- I first learned about Karl Popper via Frans Osinga’s book on John Boyd
- His idea of falsification is one of the key epistemological shifts of the last ~100 years. He was considered the shit, and then Thomas Kuhn came along with his idea of “paradigm shifts” and then everyone became Kuhn Heads. But Popper is still great
- From Gemini:
Prompt: could you explain what a "Popperian truth" is, from Karl Popper
The Elusive Nature of “Popperian Truth”: A Never-Ending Quest for What Is
In the philosophical landscape shaped by Sir Karl Popper, one of the 20th century’s most influential philosophers of science, the concept of “truth” is not a final destination but rather a guiding star on an unending journey of discovery. A “Popperian truth” is not an absolute, verifiable fact, but rather the current, most robust and well-tested understanding of reality, one that has so far withstood all attempts to prove it false.
At the heart of Popper’s philosophy lies the principle of ==falsification==. He argued that scientific theories can never be definitively proven true. No matter how much evidence accumulates in support of a theory, there is always the possibility that a future observation will contradict it. For example, for centuries, Europeans observing countless white swans could have reasonably concluded that “all swans are white.” However, the discovery of a single black swan in Australia instantly falsified this long-held belief.
This leads to the core tenets of Popper’s view on truth:
Truth as a Regulative Ideal: Popper did believe in the existence of objective truth, in the sense that statements can correspond to reality. However, he maintained that we can never be certain that we have attained it. Truth, therefore, acts as a “regulative ideal,” a standard that we continually strive for, even if it remains forever just beyond our grasp. The goal of science is to get progressively closer to this truth.
The Provisional Nature of Knowledge: For Popper, all scientific knowledge is provisional. It is the best explanation we have at any given moment, but it is always open to revision or outright rejection in the light of new evidence. A “Popperian truth” is therefore our best current conjecture, the most successful survivor in a continuous process of elimination.
Verisimilitude: The “Truth-Likeness” of Theories: To explain how science progresses even when its theories are ultimately found to be false, Popper introduced the ==concept of verisimilitude, or “truth-likeness.” The idea is that even if a theory is not absolutely true, it can be closer to the truth than its predecessors. A new theory has greater verisimilitude if it explains more phenomena, has greater predictive power, and has withstood more rigorous attempts at falsification than the theory it replaces. For instance, Einstein’s theory of relativity is considered to have greater verisimilitude than Newton’s theory of gravity== because it explains a wider range of phenomena, even though Newton’s theory remains a powerful tool in many contexts.
The Crucial Distinction Between Truth and Certainty: Popper was adamant about distinguishing between truth and certainty. He argued that the quest for certainty is a futile and misguided endeavour. Instead, he championed a spirit of critical rationalism, where we should be open to the possibility that even our most cherished beliefs may be wrong. The value lies in the persistent search for errors, for it is through identifying and correcting our mistakes that we can move closer to the truth.
In essence, a “Popperian truth” is a humble yet powerful concept. It acknowledges the limits of human knowledge while simultaneously championing the relentless pursuit of a more accurate understanding of the world. It is a truth defined not by its finality, but by its resilience in the face of constant critical scrutiny.
- (So, it’s similar to Bayesianism, where to say you’re 100% certain of something is typically pretty dumb)