Product Description

First published in English in 1959, Karl Popper's The Logic of Scientific Discovery revolutionized contemporary thinking about science and knowledge and is one of the most widely read books about science written last century. Described by the philosopher AJ Ayer as 'a work of great originality and power', Popper presents the two ideas that did more than anything else to make him famous: that the only true knowledge is scientific knowledge and that knowledge grows only when on testing a theory, it can be shown to be false. Popper's now legendary doctrine of 'falsificationism' electrified the scientific community, influencing even the methods of working scientists. It also had a profound effect on the shape of post war philosophy. Translated into many languages, it ranks alongside The Open Society and Its Enemies as one of Popper's most enduring and famous books and contains insights and arguments that demand to be read to this day.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #18290 in Books
• Published on: 2002-02-21
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 544 pages

Peter Medawar, New Scientist
One of the most important documents of the twentieth century

Review
'One of the most important documents of the twentieth century.' – Peter Medawar, New Scientist

Times Literary Supplement
Professor Popper's thesis has that quality of greatness that, once seen, it appears simple and almost obvious.

Customer Reviews

THE philosophy of science thesis.
Oddly, Popper isn't my recommended starting point for philosophy of science (Kuhn is). But Popper is what Kuhn was building on.
Written back in the '30's when the field was in its infancy, Popper's text sets out and argues the basic tenets of the 'scientific method'. Popper's 'falsifiability' criterion is still the single strongest feature distinguishing the scientific from the unscientific, and that, for me, is what the book is about.
Yes, it begins with falsification. Yes, later authors showed that tested falsifiable hypothesis does not account - by a long way - for the adoption of new theories in science. And yes, the increasingly uncertain nature of experiment and the subjective elements of interpretation make 'falsification' a far more slippery concept than a naive reading of Popper implies. But the great contribution here is the recognition that 'scientific method' can prove the particular, and while that cannot prove the general, it can eliminate the false. On top of that, Popper's historical case studies are well written and thought-provoking, which makes a heavy topic a fair read.
No book on this topic can be the only book to have; different authors cast different lights on the field. But this is one of the pivots, on which the arguments of many a later author turned. A very nearly must-have.

The only philosopher book you'll ever need
With millions of trees being massacred to debate "philosophy of maths and/or science", this is the only worthwhile sacrifice. Popper lays out directly what it means to be a science, how you evaluate a scientific theory and that you can never know you are right only that you are wrong.

Whilst there are other aspects that a proposed theory may have that makes it attractive over other possibilities, if it cannot be falsified, if it cannot be shown to leap through the experimental hoops that previous theories have managed then it is simply not going to get accepted. Falsifiability is sine non qua of any scientific theory, one only has to look at the pain String Theory is starting to go through to see that no matter how "beautiful", how smart it's proponents are - and String Theory has the absolute smartest - and how well-funded it is.... at the end of the day if you cannot make predictions that can be tested you will fail as a science.

Popper lays this out and it is a sad commentary that he is probably less read than people like Latour and Kuhn - just check the number of review for Kuhn vs the maestro. When the revolution comes and the trees take over the world, ALL the other philosophers and "sociologists" of science like Kuhn, Fuller, Latour etc will be the first up against the wall. I can't wait!

A classic in the philosophy of science
This book is a classic in the philosophy of science. However, Popper remains stuck in his naive falsificationalism which is superceded by philosophers like Kuhn, Lakatos and Feyerabend. Nevertheless, a must for anyone interested in the philosophy of science.