Skip to main content
↑ Back to the start
6 months 3 weeks ago
A principle of induction would be a statement with the help of which we could put inductive inferences into a logically acceptable form. In the eyes of the upholders of inductive logic, a principle of induction is of supreme importance for scientific method: "... this principle", says Reichenbach, "determines the truth of scientific theories. To eliminate it from science would mean nothing less than to deprive science of the power to decide the truth or falsity of its theories. Without it, clearly, science would no longer have the right to distinguish its theories from the fanciful and arbitrary creations of the poet's mind."Now this principle of induction cannot be a purely logical truth like a tautology or an analytic statement. Indeed, if there were such a thing as a purely logical principle of induction, there would be no problem of induction; for in this case, all inductive inferences would have to be regarded as purely logical or tautological transformations, just like inferences in inductive logic. Thus the principle of induction must be a synthetic statement; that is, a statement whose negation is not self-contradictory but logically possible. So the question arises why such a principle should be accepted at all, and how we can justify its acceptance on rational grounds.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
Ch. 1 "A Survey of Some Fundamental Problems", Section 1: The Problem of Induction, pp. 4–5.
6 months 3 weeks ago
...no matter how many instances of white swans we may have observed, this does not justify the conclusion that all swans are white.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
Ch. 1 "A Survey of Some Fundamental Problems", Section 1: The Problem of Induction, p. 4.
6 months 3 weeks ago
Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
As quoted in My Universe : A Transcendent Reality (2011) by Alex Vary, Part II
6 months 3 weeks ago
Philosophers should consider the fact that the greatest happiness principle can easily be made an excuse for a benevolent dictatorship. We should replace it by a more modest and more realistic principle — the principle that the fight against avoidable misery should be a recognized aim of public policy, while the increase of happiness should be left, in the main, to private initiative.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
As quoted in 1,001 Pearls of Wisdom (2006) by David Ross
6 months 3 weeks ago
Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
As quoted in In Passing: Condolences and Complaints on Death, Dying, and Related Disappointments (2005) by Jon Winokur, p. 144
6 months 3 weeks ago
When I speak of reason or rationalism, all I mean is the conviction that we can learn through criticism of our mistakes and errors, especially through criticism by others, and eventually also through self-criticism. A rationalist is simply someone for whom it is more important to learn than to be proved right; someone who is willing to learn from others — not by simply taking over another's opinions, but by gladly allowing others to criticize his ideas and by gladly criticizing the ideas of others. The emphasis here is on the idea of criticism or, to be more precise, critical discussion. The genuine rationalist does not think that he or anyone else is in possession of the truth; nor does he think that mere criticism as such helps us achieve new ideas. But he does think that, in the sphere of ideas, only critical discussion can help us sort the wheat from the chaff. He is well aware that acceptance or rejection of an idea is never a purely rational matter; but he thinks that only critical discussion can give us the maturity to see an idea from more and more sides and to make a correct judgement of it.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
"On Freedom" in All Life is Problem Solving (1999)
6 months 3 weeks ago
If the many, the specialists, gain the day, it will be the end of science as we know it - of great science. It will be a spiritual catastrophe comparable in its consequences to nuclear armament.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
K. Popper, The Myth of the Framework, London: Routledge. As quoted in [https://books.google.it/Brooks?id=ha6yDAAQBAJ&of=PA173 The Cambridge Companion to Karl Popper] (2016) by J. Shearmur, G. Stokes
6 months 3 weeks ago
I appeal to the philosophers of all countries to unite and never again mention Heidegger or talk to another philosopher who defends Heidegger. This man was a devil. I mean, he behaved like a devil to his beloved teacher, and he has a devilish influence on Germany. ... One has to read Heidegger in the original to see what a swindler he was.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
As quoted in "At 90, and Still Dynamic : Revisiting Sir Karl Popper and Attending His Birthday Party" by Eugene Yue-Ching Ho, in Intellectus 23 (Jul-Sep 1992)
6 months 3 weeks ago
I think so badly of philosophy that I don't like to talk about it. ... I do not want to say anything bad about my dear colleagues, but the profession of teacher of philosophy is a ridiculous one. We don't need a thousand of trained, and badly trained, philosophers — it is very silly. Actually most of them have nothing to say.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
As quoted in "At 90, and Still Dynamic : Revisiting Sir Karl Popper and Attending His Birthday Party" by Eugene Yue-Ching Ho, in Intellectus 23 (Jul-Sep 1992)
6 months 3 weeks ago
It seems to me that I may be living too long. Indeed: my nearest relations have all died, and so have some of my best friends, and even some of my best pupils. However, I do not have a reason to complain. I am grateful and happy to be alive, and still be able to continue with my work, if only just. My work seems to me more important than ever.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
As quoted in [http://www.eeng.dcu.ie/~tkpw/hk-ies/n23a/ "At 90, and Still Dynamic : Revisiting Sir Karl Popper and Attending His Birthday Party" by Eugene Yue-Ching Ho, in Intellectus 23 (Jul-Sep 1992)]

CivilSimian.com created by AxiomaticPanic, CivilSimian, Kalokagathia