IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prg/jnlelg/v2016y2016i1id429p25-45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Critical Review Of Several Aspects Of Popper'S Work In Relation To The Demarcation Problem
[Kritika některých aspektů díla K. R. Poppera ve vztahu k demarkačnímu problému]

Author

Listed:
  • Petr Jedlička

Abstract

The opening section briefly examines Popper's theory of demarcation and his views on inductive methods, the role of metaphysics in science, and falsification. Upon publication the work of this Viennese philosopher met a wide range of reactions, from partial modifications to proposals of new theories inspired by his work to complete dismissal. The main lines of critical argument against Popper's doctrine will be outlined here: I will argue that his complete rejection of inductive methodology is unjustified and will call for its partial acceptance in science. I will also challenge the shortcomings of Popper's idea of falsifiability and his demarcation criterion, the limited suitability of which will be demonstrated with typical examples of "pseudoscience" such as psychoanalysis and astrology. The last section proposes a moderate approach in the induction-deduction debate. In closing I will assess the practical value of Popper's theories in today's science.

Suggested Citation

  • Petr Jedlička, 2016. "Critical Review Of Several Aspects Of Popper'S Work In Relation To The Demarcation Problem [Kritika některých aspektů díla K. R. Poppera ve vztahu k demarkačnímu problému]," E-LOGOS, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(1), pages 25-45.
    • Handle: RePEc:prg:jnlelg:v:2016:y:2016:i:1:id:429:p:25-45
    DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://elogos.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.e-logos.429.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://elogos.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.e-logos.429.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18267/j.e-logos.429?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prg:jnlelg:v:2016:y:2016:i:1:id:429:p:25-45. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Stanislav Vojir (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/uevsecz.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.