Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, London, 1965
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Note on the Third Impression
- Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research?
- Against ‘Normal Science’
- Does the Distinction between Normal and Revolutionary Science Hold Water?
- Normal Science, Scientific Revolutions and the History of Science
- Normal Science and its Dangers
- The Nature of a Paradigm
- Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes
- Consolations for the Specialist
- Reflections on my Critics
- Index
- References
Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2014
By
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Note on the Third Impression
- Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research?
- Against ‘Normal Science’
- Does the Distinction between Normal and Revolutionary Science Hold Water?
- Normal Science, Scientific Revolutions and the History of Science
- Normal Science and its Dangers
- The Nature of a Paradigm
- Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes
- Consolations for the Specialist
- Reflections on my Critics
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Criticism and the Growth of KnowledgeProceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, London, 1965, pp. 91 - 196Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1970
References
[1962]: ‘The Confusion between Physics and Metaphysics in the Standard Histories of Sciences’, in the Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of the History of Science, 1964, 1, pp. 231–8.Google Scholar
[1964]: ‘Scientific Problems and Their Roots in Metaphysics’, in (ed.): The Critical Approach to Science and Philosophy, 1964, pp. 189–211.Google Scholar
[1968]: ‘The Novelty of Popper's Philosophy of Science’, International Philosophical Quarterly, 8, pp. 442–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1969]: ‘Popper on Learning from Experience’, in (ed.): Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 1969.Google Scholar
[1968]: ‘Theories of Demarcation between Science and Metaphysics’, in and (eds): Problems in the Philosophy of Science, 1968, pp. 40–64.Google Scholar
and [1933]: ‘Zur Theorie des β-Zerfalls’, Zeitschrift fur Physik, 86, pp. 105–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1913a]: ‘On the Constitution of Atoms and Molecules’, Philosophical Magazine, 26, pp. 1–25, 476-S02 and 857-75.Google Scholar
[1930]: ‘Chemistry and the Quantum Theory of Atomic Constitution’, Faraday Lecture 1930, Journal of the Chemical Society, 1932/1, pp. 349–84.Google Scholar
[1949]: ‘Discussion with Einstein on Epistemological Problems in Atomic Physics’, in (ed.): Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist, 1949, 1, pp. 201–41.Google Scholar
[1948]: ‘Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck’, Obituary Notices of Fellows of the Royal Society, 6, 161–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1938]: ‘The Relevance of Psychology to Logic’, Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volumes, 17, pp. 19–41.Google Scholar
[1914]: ‘The Pressure of Radiation and Carnot's Principle,’ Nature, 92, p. 553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and [1961]: ‘A Note on Prediction and Deduction’, Philosophy of Science, 1961, 28, pp. 204–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1886]: Presidential Address to the Chemistry Section of the British Association, Report of British Association, 1886, pp. 558–76.Google Scholar
[1888]: Report at the Annual General Meeting, Journal of the Chemical Society, S3, pp. 487-504.Google Scholar
[1936]: ‘Does Conservation of Energy Hold in Atomic Processes?’, nature, 137, pp. 298–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1968]: ‘Length Contraction and Clock Synchronisation: The Empirical Equivalence of the Einsteinian and Lorentzian Theories’, The British Journalfor the Philosophy of Science, 19, pp. 67–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1906]: La Theorie Physique, Son Objet et Sa Structure, 1905. English translation of the second (1914) edition: The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory, 1954.Google Scholar
[1964]: ‘The Neurophysiological Basis of Experience’, in (ed.): The Critical Approach to Science and Philosophy, 1964.Google Scholar
[1911]: ‘Welche Züge der Lichtquantenhypothese spielen in der Theorie der Wärmestrahlung eine wesentliche Rolle?’, Annahm der Physik, 36, pp. 91–118.Google Scholar
[1909]: ‘Über die Entwicklung unserer Anschauungen über das Wesen und die Konstitution der Strahlung’, Physikalische Zeitschrift, 10, pp. 817–26.Google Scholar
[1927]: ‘Neue Experimente über den Einfluss der Erdbewegung auf die Lichtgeschwindigkeit relativ zur Erde’, Forschungen und Fortschritte, 3, p. 36.Google Scholar
[1928]: Letter to Schrödinger, 31.5.1928; published in (ed.): Briefe Zur Wellenmechanik, 1963.Google Scholar
[1931]: ‘Gedenkworte auf Albert A. Michelson’, Zeitschrift für angewandte Chemie, 44, p. 658.Google Scholar
[1949]: ‘Autobiographical Notes’, in (ed.): Albert Einstein, Philosopher-Scientist, I, pp 2-95.Google Scholar
and [1933] : ‘Energy Relations in the β-Ray Type of Radioactive Disintegration’, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 96, pp. 502–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and [1927] : ‘The Average Energy of Disintegration of Radium E’, Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series A, 117, pp. 109–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1933] : ‘Tentativo di una teoria dell emissione dei raggi “beta”’, Ricerci Scientifica, 4(a), pp. 491–5.Google Scholar
[1934] : ‘Versuch einer Theorie der β-Strahlen. I’, Zeitschrift für Physik, 88, pp. 161–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1959]: ‘Comments on Grünbaum's “Law and Convention in Physical Theory”’, in (eds): Current Issues in the Philosophy of Science, 1961, pp. 155–61.Google Scholar
[1965] : ‘Reply to Criticism’, in and (eds) : Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, II, pp. 223–61.Google Scholar
[1968–1969]: ‘On a Recent Critique of Complementarity’, Philosophy of Science, 35, pp. 309–31 and 36, pp. 82–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1969] : ‘Problems of Empiricism II’, in (ed.): The nature and Function of Scientific Theory, 1969.Google Scholar
[1912]: ‘Observations of the Principal and Other Series of lines in the Spectrum of Hydrogen’, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 73, pp. 62–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1914] : ‘Series Lines in Spark Spectra’, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (A), 90, pp. 426–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1818]: ‘Lettre à François Arago sur l'Influence du Mouvement Terrestre dans quelques Phénomènes Optiques’, Annales de Chimie et de Physique, 9, pp. 57 ff.Google Scholar
[1959a] : ‘The Falsifiability of the Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction Hypothesis’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 10, pp. 48–50.Google Scholar
[1959b]: ‘Law and Convention in Physical Theory’, in and (eds): Current Issues in the Philosophy of Science, 1961, pp. 40–155.Google Scholar
[1966]: ‘The Falsifiability of a Component of a Theoretical System’, in and (eds.): Mind, Matter and Method: Essays in Philosophy and Science in Honor of Herbert Feigl, 1966, pp. 273–305.Google Scholar
[1969]: ‘Can We Ascertain the Falsity of a Scientific Hypothesis?’, Studium Generale, 22, pp. 1061–93.Google ScholarPubMed
[1955]: ‘The Development of the Interpretation of Quantum Theory’, in (ed.): Niels Bohr and the Development of Physics, 1955.Google Scholar
[1952]: ‘Some Theses on Empirical Certainty’, The Review of Metaphysics, 5, pp. 620–1.Google Scholar
[1934]: ‘The Upper Limits of the Continuous β-rzy Spectra of Thorium C and C11’, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 147, pp 572–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1968]: Review of Grünbaum [1966], The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 18, pp. 333–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1961]: ‘Göttingen, Copenhagen, Leipzig im Rückblick’, in (ed.): Werner Heisenberg und die Physik unserer Zeit, Braunschweig 1961.Google Scholar
[1960] : Michelson and the Speed of Light, 1960.CrossRef
[1911]: ‘Zur Theorie der Strahlungserscheinungen’, Annalen der Physik, 36, pp. 534–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and [1935]: ‘On the Fermi theory of β-radioactivity’, Physical Review, 48, pp. 7–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1923] : ‘Das Korrespondenzprinzip und der Schalenbau des Atoms’, Die naturwissenschaften, 11, pp. 550–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1929–1930]: ‘Der wellenmechanische Charakter des β-Zerfalls, I–II–III’, Zeitschrift für Physik, 57, pp. 257–60, 60, pp. 168–75 and 176–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1962]: ‘Infinite Regress and the Foundations of Mathematics’, Aristoelian Society Supplementary Volume, 36, pp. 155–84.Google Scholar
[1963–1964]: ‘Proofs and Refutations’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 14, pp. 1–25, 120–39, 221–43, 296–342.Google Scholar
[1968a]: ‘Changes in the Problem of Inductive Logic’, in (ed.): The Problem of Inductive Logic, 1968, pp. 315–417.Google Scholar
[19686]: ‘Criticism and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, in Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 69, pp. 149–86.Google Scholar
[1971a]: ‘Popper zum Abgrenzungs- und Induktionsproblem’, in (ed.): Neue Aspekte der Wissenschaftstheorie, 1971. The English version appeared in 1974.Google Scholar
[19716]: ‘History of Science and its Rational Reconstructions’, in and (eds.): PSA 1970, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 8, pp. 91–135.Google Scholar
[1971c]: ‘Replies to Critics’, in and (eds.): PSA 1970, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. 8, pp. 174–82.Google Scholar
[1904]: ‘On the Ascertained Absence of Effects of Motion through the Aether, in Relation to the Constitution of Matter, and on the Fitzgerald-Lorentz Hypothesis’, Philosophical Magazine, Series 6, 7, pp. 621–5.Google Scholar
[1965]: ‘Griinbaum on “The Duhemian Argument”’, Philosophy of Science, 32, pp. 295–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1886]: De l'Influence du Mouvement de la Terre sur les Phénomènes Lumineux', Versl. Kon. Akad. Wetensch. Amsterdam, 2, pp. 297-358. Reprinted in Lorentz: Collected Papers, 4, 1937, pp. 153–218.Google Scholar
[1892a]: ‘The Relative Motion of the Earth and the Ether’, Versl. Kon. Akad. Wetensch. Amsterdam, I, pp. 74–7. Reprinted in Lorentz: Collected Papers, 4, 1937, pp. 219–23.Google Scholar
[1899]: ‘Science et Philosophie’, Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 7, pp. 375–425, 503–62, 706–31.Google Scholar
[18926]: ‘Stokes' Theory of Aberration’, Versl. Kon. Akad. Wetensch. Amsterdam, I, pp. 97-103. Reprinted in Lorentz: Collected Papers, 4, 1937, pp. 224–31.Google Scholar
[1895]: Versucheiner Theorie der electrischen und optischen Erscheinungen in bewegten Körpern, 1895, § 89-92.Google Scholar
[1897]: ‘Concerning the Problem of the Dragging Along of the Ether by the Earth’, Versl. Kon. Akad. Wetensch. Amsterdam, 6, pp. 266–72. Reprinted in Lorentz: Collected Papers, 4, 1937, pp. 237–44.Google Scholar
[1923]: “The Rotation of the Earth and its Influence on Optical Phenomena”, Nature, 112, pp. 103–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1968]: ‘Statistical Significance in Psychological Research’, Psychological Bulletin, 70, pp. 151–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[1825]: The Principles of Political Economy: With a Sketch of the Rise and Progress of the Science, 1825.
[1860]: ‘Commentary on Stas' Researches on the Mutual Relations of Atomic Weights’, reprinted in Prout's Hypothesis, Alembic Club Reprints, 20, pp. 48–58.
[1967]: ‘Theory Testing in Psychology and Physics: a Methodological Paradox’, Philosophy of Science, 34, pp. 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1933]: ‘Kernstruktur’, in (eds.): Handbuch der Physik, Zweite Auflage, 22/1, pp. 118–52.Google Scholar
and [1930]: ‘Uber eine absolute Bestimmung der Energie der primären β-Strahlen von Radium E’, Zeitschrift für Physik, 60, pp. 143–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1881]: ‘The Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether’, American Journal of Science, Ser. 3, 22, pp. 120–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1891-2]: ‘On the Application of Interference Methods to Spectroscopic Measurements, I-II’, Philosophical Magazine, Ser. 3, 31, pp. 338-46, and 34, pp. 280–99.
[1897]: ‘On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Ether’, American Jourtuil of Science, Ser. 4, 3, pp. 475–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and [1925]: ‘The Effect of the Earth's Rotation on the Velocity of Light’, Astrophysical Journal, 61, pp. 137–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and [1887]: ‘On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether’, American Journal of Science, Ser. 5, 34, pp. 333–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1843]: A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive, Being a Connected View of the Principles of Evidence, and the Methods of Scientific Investigation, 1843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and [1904]: Letter to Kelvin, published in Philosophical Magazine, Ser. 6, 8, pp. 753–4.Google Scholar
[1933]: “Wellenmechanik und Kernphysik”, in and (eds.): Handbuch der Physik, Zweite Auflage, 24/1, pp. 785–841.Google Scholar
[1968]: ‘On a Demarcation Dispute’, in and (eds.): Problems in the Philosophy of Science, 1968, pp. 78–88.Google Scholar
[19696]: Review of Ziman's ‘Public Knowledge: An Essay Concerning the Social Dimensions of Science’, in The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 20, pp. 92–4.Google Scholar
[1974]: “The Objectivism of Popper's Epistemology”, in (ed.): The Philosophy of Sir Karl Popper.Google Scholar
[1967]: ‘What is True and False in Science: Medawar ana the Anatomy of Research’, Encounter, 29, No. 3, pp. 68–70.Google Scholar
[1913]: ‘A Possible Extension of the Spectrum of Hydrogen’, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 73, pp. 382–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1958]: ‘Zur älteren und neueren Geschichte des Neutrinos’, published in , Aufsätze und Vortrage über Physik und Erkenntnistheorie, 1961, pp. 156–80.Google Scholar
(1900a]: ‘Über eine Verbesserung der Wienschen Spektralgleichung’, Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, 2, pp. 202–4; English translation in Ter Haar [1967].Google Scholar
[19006]: ‘Zur Theorie des Gesetzes der Energieverteilung im Normalspektrum’, Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft, 2, pp. 237–45; English translation in Ter Haar [1967].Google Scholar
[1947]: Scientific Autobiography, published posthumously in German in 1948, in English translation in 1950.Google Scholar
[1891]: ‘Les géométries non euclidiennes’, Revue Générale des Sciences Pures et Appliquées, 2, pp. 769–74.Google Scholar
[1968]: ‘Scepticism, Theology and the Scientific Revolution in the Seventeenth Century’, in and (eds.): Problems in the Philosophy of Science, 1968, pp. 1–28.Google Scholar
[1933]: ‘Ein Kriterium des empirischen Charakters theoretischer Systeme’, Erkenntnis, 3, pp. 426–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1935]: ‘Induktionslogik und Hypothesenwahrscheinlichkeit’, Erkenntnis, 5, pp. 170–2; published in English in his [1959a], pp. 315–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1940]: ‘What is Dialectic?’, Mind, N.S. 49, pp. 403–26; reprinted in Popper [1963], pp. 312-35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1957a]: ‘The Aim of Science’, Ratio, 1, pp. 24–35.
[1958]: ‘Philosophy and Physics’; published in Atti del XII Congresso Internazionale di Filosofia, Vol. 2, 1960, pp. 363–74.Google Scholar
[19596]: ‘Testability and “ad-Hocness” of the Contraction Hypothesis’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 10, p. 50.Google Scholar
[1967]: ‘Quantum Mechanics without “The Observer”’ in (ed.): Quantum Theory and Reality, 1967.Google Scholar
[1968a]: ‘Epistemologa without a Knowing Subject’, in and (eds.): Proceedings of the Third International Congress for Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, Amsterdam, 1968, pp. 333–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1968b]: ‘On the Theory of the Objective Mind’, in Proceedings of the XIV International Congress of Philosophy, 1, 1968, pp. 25–53.Google Scholar
[1968c]: ‘Remarks on the Problems of Demarcation and Rationality’, in and (eds.): Problems in the Philosophy of Science, 1968, pp. 88–102.Google Scholar
[1969]: ‘A Realist View of Logic, Physics and History’, in and (eds.): Physics, Logic and History, 1969.Google Scholar
[1815]: ‘On the Relation between the Specific Gravities of Bodies in their Gaseous State and the Weights of their Atoms’, Annals of Philosophy, 6, pp. 321–30; reprinted in Prout's Hypothesis, Alembic Club Reprints, 20, 1932.Google Scholar
[1943]: ‘Reply to Critics’, in (ed.): The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell, 1943. pp. 681-741.Google Scholar
[1934]: ‘Über das Fundament der Erkenntnis’, Erkenntnis, 4, pp. 79-99; published in English in Ayer (ed.): Logical Positivism, 1959, pp. 209–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1958]: ‘Might perhaps Energy be merely a Statistical Concept?’, Il Nouvo Cimento, 9, pp. 162–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1936]: ‘An Apparent Failure of the Photon Theory of Scattering’, Physical Review, 49, pp. 8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1964]: ‘Michelson-Morley Experiment’, American Journal of Physics, 32, pp. 16–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1916]: ‘Zur Quantentheorie der Spektrallinien’, Annalen der Physik, 51, pp. 1–94 and 125–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[1966]: ‘Explanation, Prediction, Scientific Systematization and Non-Explanatory Information’, Ratio, 8, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
[1845]: ‘On the Aberration of Light’, Philosophical Magazine, Third Series, 27, pp. 9–15.Google Scholar
[1846]: ‘On Fresnel's Theory of the Aberration of Light’, Philosophical Magazine, Third Series, 28, pp. 76–81.Google Scholar
[1952–1954]: ‘Effects of Acceleration in the Michelson-Morley Experiment’, The Scientific Proceedings of the Royal Dublin Society, New Series, 26, pp. 45-54.Google Scholar
[1929]: ‘On the Waves associated with β-rays, and the Relation between Free Electrons and their Waves’, Philosophical Magazine, Seventh Series, 7, pp. 405–17.Google Scholar
[1967]: ‘The Evolutionary Development of natural Science’, American Scientist, 55. pp. 456–71.Google ScholarPubMed
[1960]: ‘The Program toward Rediscovering the Rational Mechanics in the Age of Reason’, Archive of the History of Exact Sciences, 1, pp. 3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and [1925]: ‘Ersetzung der Hypothese vom unmechanischen Zwang durch eine Forderung bezüglich des inneren Verhaltens jedes einzelnen Electrons’, Die naturwissenschaften, 13, pp. 953–4.Google Scholar
[1960]: ‘When are Statements Empirical?’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 10, pp. 287–308.Google Scholar
[1968]: ‘Hume, Carnap and Popper’, in (ed.): The Problem of Inductive Logic, 1968, pp. 271–82.Google Scholar
[1837]: History of the Inductive Sciences, from the Earliest to the Present Time. Three volumes, 1837.Google Scholar
[1840]: Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Founded upon their History. Two volumes, 1840.Google Scholar
[1851]: ‘On the Transformation of Hypotheses in the History of Science’, Cambridge Philosophical Transactions, 9, pp. 139–47.Google Scholar
[1858]: Novum Organon Renovatum. Being the second part of the philosophy of the inductive sciences. Third edition, 1858.Google Scholar
[1063]: ‘The Refutability of “Irrefutable” Laws’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 13, pp. 303–6.Google Scholar
[1966]: ‘Beta Decay’, in Rendiconti della Scuola Internazionale di Fisica, “Enrico Fermi”, XXXII Corso.Google Scholar
- 2331
- Cited by