la logique de la découverte scientifique thèse

No Kindle device required. 2 - La mise en évidence de la forme logique de la théorie. And I believe that only a revival of interest in these riddles can save the sciences and philosophy from an obscurantist faith in the expert's special skill and in his personal knowledge and authority.”“In so far as a scientific statement speaks about reality, it must be falsifiable: and in so far as it is not falsifiable, it does not speak about reality.” It's not a work for the layman. For example, Galileo's observations of the solar system and the conclusions he drew therefrom depended on the underlying theory of optics being correct.

in that case there is no answer because it is not possible to take back our imagination power or philosophical refleIn or under no circumstances i.e.

All in all, this is definitely worth reading for anyone interested in the subject matter. If you don't, but have the interest and willingness to learn, it is a good book about the nature of scientific knowledge and its implications. But it soon becomes clear that there is enough value, ingenuity and originality in "The Logic" to merit reading the original book in lieu of, or in addition to, later clarifications, commentaries and critiques (including some by Popper himself). We’d love your help. Many of the appendices were highly technical in nature and were, too, incomprehensible to me. His reputation preceding him, with a pretty good idea of what the main arguments of the book are, it is a daunting task to read Popper in the original. Karl R. Popper (1902-1994), l'un des plus importants philosophes des sciences du XXe siècle, est également l'auteur, aux Éditions Payot, de Conjectures et réfutations.

Rappelons qu'il s'était d'ailleurs heurté au darwinisme qu'il n'est pas parvenu à soumettre au critère de réfutabilité... Il n'a tout de même pu renvoyer Darwin aux oubliettes comme il aurait souhaité le faire avec la psychanalyse dont il ne connaissait par ailleurs que la première topique. We cannot assume that the laws of nature still stay the same, because induction gives us no knowledge of its inner workings. Des sources de la connaissance et de l'ignorance This is not for the general reader, even one particularly interested in philosophy or science, as am I. The Logic of Scientific Discovery is more concerned with revolutionary science than with normal science.“For myself, I am interested in science and in philosophy only because I want to learn something about the riddle of the world in which we live, and the riddle of man's knowledge of that world.

It's not a work for the layman. It is a superior incite that in one stroke explains how hard sciences (which serves as its model) are done and at the same times solves the demarcation problem in distinguishing between whether a concept is scientific or not.

Popper is interested in reclaiming the objectivity of science, and while it's not obvious he succeeds, he writes with great conversational clarity, which makes this an exhilarating and unexpectedly fast read. «Voici enfin que nous par¬ vient, traduit en français, ce grand et puissant livre », nous dit le préfacier, Jacques Monod. As was the chapter on quantum theory. Seniority or quantifiable capability?This book gets five stars simply on influence on subsequent philosophers of science. In order to navigate out of this carousel, please use your heading shortcut key to navigate to the next or previous heading.

), the problem of the growth of knowledge (what makes science peculiar in this regard? Il a depuis subi plusieurs rééditions, avec des additions. Both assumptions cannot be proven. So the logical content of p is at least equal to that of a statement q, if q is derivable from p."Strictly to be confined within the realms of the scientific disciplines. Popper reconciles Kant's observations about how the world is ultimately filtered through the lenses of space and time with a fundamentally empiricist, materialist sense of reality. In the end I skipped whole sections of the book that were going in one eye and out of the oUmm, how do I review a book like this? I can't say I "enjoyed" it. Popper assumes a lot of knowledge in the reader regarding probability theory, quantum mechanics, and logic.

This, I think, is a complete perversion of how science is conducted; and so does Popper.

Pour sortir de ce carrousel, utilisez votre touche de raccourci d'en-tête pour accéder à l'en-tête suivant ou précédent.Cette fonction d'achat continuera à charger des articles lorsque la touche Entrée est enfoncée. La structure des révolutions scientifiques

You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.This shopping feature will continue to load items when the Enter key is pressed. Find La logique de la découverte scientifique by Popper Karl, Monod Jacques, Thyssen-Rutten Nicole, Devaux Philippe - 2017 COVID-19 Update May 22, 2020: Biblio is open and shipping orders. While I disagree with some of his assertions-- especially his complete disavowal of inductive reasoning, and his general disregard for non-scientific knowledge-- I respect his method and, as a fellow empiricist, believ90% of the value of Popper today, especially for the non-scientist is in the first part of the book.