THE EPISTEMOLOGIST THOUGHT OF KARL POPPER
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2009 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | ConTexto |
Texto Completo: | https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/ConTexto/article/view/11236 |
Resumo: | Since the antiquity, the criterion of landmark between what it is science and what is not science has been argued. The notion that then was had of science coincided with the search of absolute knowing. One became necessary, for the Greek thinkers, between them, Aristotle, Pythagoras and Descartes, the consolidation of a necessary distinction between knowing contingent and necessary knowing; therefore the only speech that could satisfy to the requirements of the scientific severity was that one that pointed, in the phenomena, causal connections whose necessity could be demonstrated. Before de Popper, the philosophical thought occidental person crossed centuries trying to explain why our theories frequent were missed. In its basic workmanship, the Logic of the Scientific Research, Karl Popper places in new terms the epistemological quarrel when demonstrating that the error, instead of being one badly that it can be prevented through the resource to some specific methodologies procedure, constitutes inevitable component of any scientific theory, being the engine for which science if it moves. Searching to catch the logic of the development of science, Popper initiates its exposition destroying that one that perhaps was, of all the philosophical principles, most expensive to the scientists and the good part of the philosophers of its time: the principle of the induction as method of scientific procedure. In this article, some of the main topics of the popper thought are approached, as the principle of the induction, the conception of science and the falsifiability. Also one intends to allege some debates philosophical, juxtaposing to the opinions of Popper and critics to its thought. The plea alluded to the popper thought come of the professor Thomas S. Kuhn, of Princeton University. Kuhn objects to the opinion of Popper when this states that the scientist is a solution of problems. For Kuhn, the scientists are solvers of enigmas and not of problems. This position, states Kuhn, is almost contrary of Popper. These few differences of opinion between Kuhn and Popper have as intention to develop the erudition on popper thought. One perceives that the originally scientific procedure starts where it finishes the induction. The systematic empirical comment is always a posterior stage to the elaboration of an original hypothesis and has the only purpose to test this hypothesis. The Sir fits a manifestation of gratitude here Karl Raimund Popper for its contribution to the development of the scientific knowledge. |
id |
UFRGS-23_8c2178510b46fe77469d28f147972b8e |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:seer.ufrgs.br:article/11236 |
network_acronym_str |
UFRGS-23 |
network_name_str |
ConTexto |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
THE EPISTEMOLOGIST THOUGHT OF KARL POPPERO PENSAMENTO EPISTEMOLÓGICO DE KARL POPPEREpistemologists Thought. Karl Popper. Inductivism. Science. Thomas Kuhn. Falsifiability.Pensamento Epistemológico. Karl Popper. Indutivismo. Ciência. Thomas Kuhn. Falseabilidade.Since the antiquity, the criterion of landmark between what it is science and what is not science has been argued. The notion that then was had of science coincided with the search of absolute knowing. One became necessary, for the Greek thinkers, between them, Aristotle, Pythagoras and Descartes, the consolidation of a necessary distinction between knowing contingent and necessary knowing; therefore the only speech that could satisfy to the requirements of the scientific severity was that one that pointed, in the phenomena, causal connections whose necessity could be demonstrated. Before de Popper, the philosophical thought occidental person crossed centuries trying to explain why our theories frequent were missed. In its basic workmanship, the Logic of the Scientific Research, Karl Popper places in new terms the epistemological quarrel when demonstrating that the error, instead of being one badly that it can be prevented through the resource to some specific methodologies procedure, constitutes inevitable component of any scientific theory, being the engine for which science if it moves. Searching to catch the logic of the development of science, Popper initiates its exposition destroying that one that perhaps was, of all the philosophical principles, most expensive to the scientists and the good part of the philosophers of its time: the principle of the induction as method of scientific procedure. In this article, some of the main topics of the popper thought are approached, as the principle of the induction, the conception of science and the falsifiability. Also one intends to allege some debates philosophical, juxtaposing to the opinions of Popper and critics to its thought. The plea alluded to the popper thought come of the professor Thomas S. Kuhn, of Princeton University. Kuhn objects to the opinion of Popper when this states that the scientist is a solution of problems. For Kuhn, the scientists are solvers of enigmas and not of problems. This position, states Kuhn, is almost contrary of Popper. These few differences of opinion between Kuhn and Popper have as intention to develop the erudition on popper thought. One perceives that the originally scientific procedure starts where it finishes the induction. The systematic empirical comment is always a posterior stage to the elaboration of an original hypothesis and has the only purpose to test this hypothesis. The Sir fits a manifestation of gratitude here Karl Raimund Popper for its contribution to the development of the scientific knowledge.Desde a antiguidade, o critério de demarcação entre o que é ciência e o que não é ciência tem sido discutido. A noção que então se tinha de ciência coincidia com a busca do saber absoluto. Tornava-se necessária, para os pensadores gregos, entre eles, Aristóteles, Pitágoras e Descartes, a consolidação de uma distinção precisa entre o saber contingente e o saber necessário, pois o único discurso que poderia satisfazer às exigências do rigor científico era aquele que apontasse, nos fenômenos, conexões causais cuja necessidade pudesse ser demonstrada. Antes de Popper, o pensamento filosófico ocidental atravessou séculos tentando explicar por que nossas teorias frequentemente estavam erradas. Em sua obra fundamental, A Lógica da Pesquisa Científica, Karl Popper coloca em novos termos a discussão epistemológica ao demonstrar que o erro, em vez de ser um mal que pode ser evitado através do recurso a algum procedimento metodológico específico, constitui componente inevitável de qualquer teoria científica, sendo o motor pelo qual a ciência se move. Buscando captar a lógica do desenvolvimento da ciência, Popper inicia sua exposição destruindo aquele que talvez fosse, de todos os princípios filosóficos, o mais caro aos cientistas e à boa parte dos filósofos de seu tempo: o princípio da indução como método de procedimento científico. Neste artigo, abordam-se alguns dos principais tópicos do pensamento popperiano, como o princípio da indução, a concepção de ciência e a falseabilidade. Também se intenta aduzir alguns debates filosóficos, justapondo às opiniões de Popper e de críticos ao seu pensamento. A contestação aludida ao pensamento popperiano advém do professor Thomas S. Kuhn, da Princeton University. Kuhn objeta à opinião de Popper quando este afirma que o cientista é um solucionador de problemas. Para Kuhn, os cientistas são solucionadores de enigmas e não de problemas. Essa posição, afirma Kuhn, é quase contrária a de Popper. Essas poucas diferenças de opinião entre Kuhn e Popper têm como intuito incrementar a erudição sobre o pensamento popperiano. Percebe-se que o procedimento genuinamente científico começa onde termina a indução. A observação empírica sistemática é sempre uma etapa posterior à elaboração de uma hipótese original e tem a finalidade única de testar essa hipótese. Cabe aqui uma manifestação de gratidão a Sir Karl Raimund Popper por sua colaboração ao desenvolvimento do conhecimento científico.UFRGS2009-11-04info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionAvaliado por Paresapplication/pdfhttps://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/ConTexto/article/view/11236ConTexto - Contabilidade em Texto; v. 7 n. 11 (2007): 1º semestre 20072175-87511676-6016reponame:ConTextoinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)instacron:UFRGSporhttps://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/ConTexto/article/view/11236/6639Schmidt, PauloSantos, José Luiz dosinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2009-11-04T18:17:10Zoai:seer.ufrgs.br:article/11236Revistahttps://www.seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/ConTexto/indexPUBhttpw://www.seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/ConTexto/oaifernanda.momo@ufrgs.br||contexto@ufrgs.br2175-87511676-6016opendoar:2009-11-04T18:17:10ConTexto - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
THE EPISTEMOLOGIST THOUGHT OF KARL POPPER O PENSAMENTO EPISTEMOLÓGICO DE KARL POPPER |
title |
THE EPISTEMOLOGIST THOUGHT OF KARL POPPER |
spellingShingle |
THE EPISTEMOLOGIST THOUGHT OF KARL POPPER Schmidt, Paulo Epistemologists Thought. Karl Popper. Inductivism. Science. Thomas Kuhn. Falsifiability. Pensamento Epistemológico. Karl Popper. Indutivismo. Ciência. Thomas Kuhn. Falseabilidade. |
title_short |
THE EPISTEMOLOGIST THOUGHT OF KARL POPPER |
title_full |
THE EPISTEMOLOGIST THOUGHT OF KARL POPPER |
title_fullStr |
THE EPISTEMOLOGIST THOUGHT OF KARL POPPER |
title_full_unstemmed |
THE EPISTEMOLOGIST THOUGHT OF KARL POPPER |
title_sort |
THE EPISTEMOLOGIST THOUGHT OF KARL POPPER |
author |
Schmidt, Paulo |
author_facet |
Schmidt, Paulo Santos, José Luiz dos |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Santos, José Luiz dos |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Schmidt, Paulo Santos, José Luiz dos |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Epistemologists Thought. Karl Popper. Inductivism. Science. Thomas Kuhn. Falsifiability. Pensamento Epistemológico. Karl Popper. Indutivismo. Ciência. Thomas Kuhn. Falseabilidade. |
topic |
Epistemologists Thought. Karl Popper. Inductivism. Science. Thomas Kuhn. Falsifiability. Pensamento Epistemológico. Karl Popper. Indutivismo. Ciência. Thomas Kuhn. Falseabilidade. |
description |
Since the antiquity, the criterion of landmark between what it is science and what is not science has been argued. The notion that then was had of science coincided with the search of absolute knowing. One became necessary, for the Greek thinkers, between them, Aristotle, Pythagoras and Descartes, the consolidation of a necessary distinction between knowing contingent and necessary knowing; therefore the only speech that could satisfy to the requirements of the scientific severity was that one that pointed, in the phenomena, causal connections whose necessity could be demonstrated. Before de Popper, the philosophical thought occidental person crossed centuries trying to explain why our theories frequent were missed. In its basic workmanship, the Logic of the Scientific Research, Karl Popper places in new terms the epistemological quarrel when demonstrating that the error, instead of being one badly that it can be prevented through the resource to some specific methodologies procedure, constitutes inevitable component of any scientific theory, being the engine for which science if it moves. Searching to catch the logic of the development of science, Popper initiates its exposition destroying that one that perhaps was, of all the philosophical principles, most expensive to the scientists and the good part of the philosophers of its time: the principle of the induction as method of scientific procedure. In this article, some of the main topics of the popper thought are approached, as the principle of the induction, the conception of science and the falsifiability. Also one intends to allege some debates philosophical, juxtaposing to the opinions of Popper and critics to its thought. The plea alluded to the popper thought come of the professor Thomas S. Kuhn, of Princeton University. Kuhn objects to the opinion of Popper when this states that the scientist is a solution of problems. For Kuhn, the scientists are solvers of enigmas and not of problems. This position, states Kuhn, is almost contrary of Popper. These few differences of opinion between Kuhn and Popper have as intention to develop the erudition on popper thought. One perceives that the originally scientific procedure starts where it finishes the induction. The systematic empirical comment is always a posterior stage to the elaboration of an original hypothesis and has the only purpose to test this hypothesis. The Sir fits a manifestation of gratitude here Karl Raimund Popper for its contribution to the development of the scientific knowledge. |
publishDate |
2009 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2009-11-04 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Avaliado por Pares |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/ConTexto/article/view/11236 |
url |
https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/ConTexto/article/view/11236 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/ConTexto/article/view/11236/6639 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UFRGS |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UFRGS |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
ConTexto - Contabilidade em Texto; v. 7 n. 11 (2007): 1º semestre 2007 2175-8751 1676-6016 reponame:ConTexto instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) instacron:UFRGS |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
instacron_str |
UFRGS |
institution |
UFRGS |
reponame_str |
ConTexto |
collection |
ConTexto |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
ConTexto - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
fernanda.momo@ufrgs.br||contexto@ufrgs.br |
_version_ |
1799766348763496448 |