Hij ging op uitnodiging van Ludwig Wittgenstein, op dat moment de ster van dit eminente discussiegenootschap waar ook grote namen als Bertrand Russell en John Maynard Keynes aanschoven. Popper en Wittgenstein werden beiden geboren in het dynamische Wenen van voor de Eerste Wereldoorlog en waren beiden gevlucht voor het fascisme. Daarmee hielden de overeenkomsten ongeveer op. Wittgenstein was een koppige miljonairszoon die in feite een hekel had aan filosofie. Hij was ervan overtuigd dat ieder vraagstuk uiteindelijk neerkwam op een taalkwestie.
|Published (Last):||12 June 2013|
|PDF File Size:||20.1 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.84 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
August, the 31st, I was searching among the statues of the great scientists at the university campus until I found my man! I sat in peace smiling and smoking then my eyes caught that guy who was doing exactly the same as I did! I immediately ran towards him asking and he confirmed me that he was there, just like me, only, for Popper!!! He actually got me back on track in a period of chaos and meaninglessness that pushed me to believe that science would be my only religion, as an absolute value!
All learning is a modification it may be a refutation of some prior knowledge and thus, in the last analysis, of some inborn knowledge. But He seems to have thought that a live universe with events unexpected even by Himself would be more interesting than a dead one. And the new why-questions may lead to a new theory which not only "explains" the old theory but corrects it. This is why the evolution of Physics is likely to be an endless process of correction and better approximation.
And even if one day we should reach a stage where our theories were no longer open to correction, because they are simply true, they would still not be complete - and we should know it. Such considerations do not prove that the objective physical world is incomplete, or undetermined: they only show the essential incompleteness of our efforts.
Why, the, should we not accept the verdict of common sense- at least until these arguments have been refuted?
With every such moral or intellectual sacrifice one gets more deeply involved. For nothing could be better than living a modest, simple, and free life in an egalitarian society. It took some time before I recognized this as no more than a beautiful dream; that freedom is more important than equality; that the attempt to realize equality endangers freedom; and that, if freedom is lost, there will not even be equality among the unfree.
All the way until he mentioned some things about the theory of evolution that forms a real problem and even quarrel inside the scientific community and of course the religious one, he took a critical situation that I find myself urged to adopt, Popper considers the theory of evolution as the best available explanatory approach to the riddle of origin of life, and he stressed on the evolutionary approach in all biological problems, in the same time he pointed out that the theory is not completely scientific, in the sense of testability, and adaptation problems for example, and he insisted that the Metaphysical part is still present and even important for upgrading and improving the theory, he finally considered it as a Metaphysical research program that necessarily needs scientific evolutionary approach!
But I think that an evolutionary approach to biological problems is inescapable, and also that in so desperate a problem situation we must clutch gratefully even at a straw. So, I propose, to start, that we regard the human mind quite naively as if it were a highly developed bodily organ, and that we ask ourselves, as we might with respect to a sense organ, what it contributes to the household of the organism.
To say that a species now living is adapted to its environment is, in fact, almost tautological. Similarly, if a species has been eliminated it must have been ill adapted to the conditions.
But its value for science as a metaphysical research programme is very great, especially if it is admitted that it may be criticized, and improved upon. Where is the field of our theories and hypotheses?!
Where and when did the first problem appear? The result is good or bad, according to whether or not we are gifted and interesting personalities. As with our children, so with our theories, and ultimately with all the work we do: our products become independent of their makers. We may gain more knowledge from our children or from our theories than we ever imparted to them.
This is how we can lift ourselves out of the morass of our ignorance; and we can all contribute to world 3. If I am right in my conjecture that we grow, and become ourselves, only in interaction with world 3, then the fact that we can all contribute to this world, if only a little, can give comfort to everyone; and especially to one who feels that in struggling with ideas he has found more happiness than he could ever deserve.
Category: Karl Popper
Unended Quest Quotes
De lessen van Karl Popper
Unended Quest: An Intellectual Autobiography