You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

falenas108 comments on Bayesian Epistemology vs Popper - Less Wrong Discussion

-1 Post author: curi 06 April 2011 11:50PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (226)

Comments (226)

Sort By: Best

Show:

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: falenas108 07 April 2011 12:28:06AM * -1 points [-]

From the research I have done in the last 5 minutes, it seems as though Popper believed that all good scientific theories should be subject to experiments that could prove them wrong.
Ex:

"the falsificationists or fallibilists say, roughly speaking, that what cannot (at present) in principle be overthrown by criticism is (at present) unworthy of being seriously considered; while what can in principle be so overthrown and yet resists all our critical efforts to do so may quite possibly be false, but is at any rate not unworthy of being seriously considered and perhaps even of being believed" -Popper

This seems to imply that theories can be proved false.

Comment author: curi comment score below threshold [+] (8 children)

Comment author: [deleted] 07 April 2011 12:59:57AM * 3 points [-]

The quote came from Conjectures and Refutations, pg 309. I agree that it doesn't say what falenas108 claims. Plus a bit has been missed out at the end: " -- though only tentatively." Also, on the following page, Popper says:

For us [fallibilists] ... science has nothing to do with the quest for certainty or probability or reliability. We are not interested in establishing scientific theories as secure, or certain, or probable. Conscious of our own fallibility we are only interested in criticizing them and testing them, hoping to find out where we are mistaken; of learning from our mistakes; and , if we are lucky, of proceeding to better theories.

So Popper would not assert that theories can be established as definitely false.

Comment author: Peterdjones 12 April 2011 08:28:49PM 0 points [-]

Of course, in reality, fallibilism just means you don't look for certainty. You can and should look for more probable theories, or as P. calls them, "better theories".

Comment author: curi 13 April 2011 01:53:00AM -2 points [-]

Hi Peter,

How did you find me here?

Comment author: falenas108 07 April 2011 12:56:18AM 0 points [-]

Citation: Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, New York: Harper and Row. Reprinted London: Routledge, 1974.

It says theories should resist being overthrown for them to be proper theories. That implies that it is possible for a theory to be overthrown.

Comment author: curi 07 April 2011 12:59:11AM * 7 points [-]

A theory can be fallibly overthrown, but not definitely overthrown, in Popper's view. Quotes out of context are easy to misread when you are not familiar with the ideas, and when you make assumptions (e.g. that overthrowing must be definitive) that the author does not make.

Comment author: falenas108 07 April 2011 01:01:26AM 3 points [-]

Ok, thanks for correcting me.

Comment author: Peterdjones 12 April 2011 08:25:35PM 1 point [-]

"A theory can be fallibly overthrown, but not definitely overthrown, in Popper's view. "

So maybe Jaynes was using "disprove" to mean "fallibly overthrow".

Comment author: curi 07 April 2011 01:10:57AM 1 point [-]

No page number isn't very nice. For anyone interested, it is on page 309, which is at the start of chapter 10 section 3.

If you read the context, you will find, for example, an explicit denouncement of the quest for certainty on the next page. Plus elaboration. Popper's position in these matters is not unclear.

falenas108 comments on Bayesian Epistemology vs Popper - Less Wrong Discussion

Article Navigation

Comments (226)

Nearest Meetups

Virtual Study Room

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Open Threads

Recent Rationality Diaries

Recent Wiki Edits

Top Contributors, 30 Days

Recent Karma Awards

Comments (226)

Top Contributors, 30 Days

You'll need to login or register to do that

(Don't worry, it only takes a few seconds)

Create

Login