more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Popper's mistake is to hold that disconfirmation and elimination work exclusively through refutation.
Gist of Idea
We don't only reject hypotheses because we have falsified them
Source
comment on Karl Popper (The Logic of Scientific Discovery [1934]) by Peter Lipton - Inference to the Best Explanation (2nd) 05 'Explanation'
Book Ref
Lipton,Peter: 'Inference to the Best Explanation (2nd ed)' [Routledge 2004], p.87
A Reaction
The point is that we reject hypotheses even if they have not actually been refuted, on the grounds that they don't give a good explanation. I agree entirely with Lipton.
Related Idea
Idea 16829 We reject deductive explanations if they don't explain, not if the deduction is bad [Lipton]
| 7779 | There is no such thing as induction [Popper, by Magee] |
| 22188 | Give Nobel Prizes for really good refutations? [Gorham on Popper] |
| 7780 | Falsification is the criterion of demarcation between science and non-science [Popper, by Magee] |
| 16830 | We don't only reject hypotheses because we have falsified them [Lipton on Popper] |
| 6794 | If falsification requires logical inconsistency, then probabilistic statements can't be falsified [Bird on Popper] |
| 6795 | When Popper gets in difficulties, he quietly uses induction to help out [Bird on Popper] |
| 3856 | Good theories have empirical content, explain a lot, and are not falsified [Popper, by Newton-Smith] |
| 3860 | Science cannot be shown to be rational if induction is rejected [Newton-Smith on Popper] |
| 22358 | Scientific objectivity lies in inter-subjective testing [Popper] |