Shadowy Man

I agree. The Character of Physical Law is a very good book on the subject.

Rusting Car Bumper

Part of Popper's problem is that he switches gears and seems to contradict himself.

The <a href="http://church.freethought.org" target="_blank">North Texas Church of Freethought</a> did a service on Popper and I presented 3 critiques of his demarcation criterion: Kuhn, Lakatos and Feyerabend.

There is are two essays in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0521280311" target="_blank">this Lakatos collection</a> which spell out Lakatos objections. He discusses Popper's examples and give his own counter-examples. He calls Pappers demarcation "instant rationality" and he objects to making hardlined "judgements" about theory form but instead favors a development of the form over time. (Keep in mind that I am being brief because I don't want to write an essay.)

Back to Sagan:
I think in the end that Popper would object to a use of the Popper demarcation criterion that is put forth by Hardcore Skeptics(TM) like CSICOP. If thisis what Sagan is promoting then I think Popper would have objections.

DC

[ October 10, 2002: Message edited by: DigitalChicken ]</p>

Hugo Holbling

DC:

I don't suppose you could send me a copy of your paper?

Yes, i hope to move on to this work when i can fit it around all the other reading i'm doing. I think Lakatos' lectures reprinted in For and Against Method are more than enough to see to Popper. Nevertheless, i look forward to learning more about his methodology of scientific research as this was the one area that received scant coverage.

I'd be very interested to see you argue this on behalf of Popper and against this usage of his demarcation criterion. If you can find the time i'm sure there are plenty here who'd appreciate it.

Rusting Car Bumper

I can but its very brief and written for a non technical audience. Popper's falsificationism was introduced by someone else so I don't discuss it... Only the critiques.

Arg! That would take a lot of time. I don't know if I'm up to that. I wonder if anyone on the net has done it as its not something I'm inventing out of thin air.

DC

Hugo Holbling

DC:

Heh! Not to worry - i just read a little too much into your comment. I'll have alook around and see if i can find anything.

G V

Hi Chekmate: Was Vork or Hugo any help?

G V

For the pro forma record only, I note the absence in the above linked index pages any reference to Feynman.

G V

What subject?
The OPQ re: KP&gt;DHW has nothing to do with:

1- Gravity
2- Math
3- Conservation
4- Symmetry
5- Time
6- QM
7- "Seeking New Laws"

Another great book not on my list:
Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy

Rusting Car Bumper

I said
The subject being the general philosophy of science. I noted that Feynman had essays and "relevant portions."

The chapter 7 noted above has a great discussion on it. So does other various essays such as "Cargo Cult Science", and essays in his book "Meaning of it All." There are a few more but I'd have look them up. I've read so much Feynman and about Feynman I don't remember where I read which comment.

DC

Skeptix2

chekmate,

As Vorkosigan stated, Popper's ideas of falsification and his demarcation between science and non-science are the the very ideas that Sagan champions in DHW. I would add that an important aspect of the demarcation proposal was "boldness".

"What the great scientist does is boldly to guess, daringly to conjecture..." Popper frankly suggests that this process is "...akin to myth making"

So science makes bold conjectures then tries to refute them by testing. Sagan propounds both of these ideas in DHW.
Skeptix2