David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 44 (4):638-661 (1977)
In recent years Sir Karl Popper has been turning his attention more and more towards philosophical problems arising from biology, particularly evolutionary biology. Popper suggests that perhaps neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory is better categorized as a metaphysical research program than as a scientific theory. In this paper it is argued that Popper can draw his conclusions only because he is abysmally ignorant of the current status of biological thought and that Popper's criticisms of biology are without force and his suggestions for its improvement are without need. Also it is suggested that Popper's desire to see scientific theory growth as being in some sense evolutionary may have led him astray about biology. And conversely it is suggested that since his claims about biology are not well taken his analysis of theory growth may well bear reexamination
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Michael Bradie (1986). Assessing Evolutionary Epistemology. Biology and Philosophy 1 (4):401-459.
Andrew S. Yang (2008). Matters of Demarcation: Philosophy, Biology, and the Evolving Fraternity Between Disciplines. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (2):211 – 225.
Donald T. Campbell (1983). The General Algorithm for Adaptation in Learning, Evolution, and Perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6 (1):178.
Michael Schmid (1988). The Idea of Rationality and its Relationship to Social Science: Comments on Popper's Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Inquiry 31 (4):451 – 469.
Timothy D. Johnson (1983). The Ecological Approach Revisited. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6 (1):184.
Similar books and articles
Calvin Hayes (2001). Fallibilism Democracy and the Market: The Meta-Theoretical Foundations of Popper's Political Philosophy. University Press of America.
Bruce Caldwell (2005). Recovering Popper: For the Left? Critical Review 17 (1-2):49-68.
F. Michael Akeroyd (2004). Popper's Evolutionary Epistemology Revamped. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 35 (2):385 - 396.
Jeff Kochan (2009). Popper's Communitarianism. In Zuzana Parusniková & Robert S. Cohen (eds.), Rethinking Popper (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 272). Springer 287--303.
Struan Jacobs (1999). Thoughts on Political Sources of Karl Popper's Philosophy of Science. Journal of Philosophical Research 24:445-457.
Adam J. Chmielewski & Karl R. Popper (1999). The Future is Open: A Conversation with Sir Karl Popper. In I. C. Jarvie & Sandra Pralong (eds.), Popper's Open Society After Fifty Years: The Continuing Relevance of Karl Popper. Routledge
David N. Stamos (2007). Popper, Laws, and the Exclusion of Biology From Genuine Science. Acta Biotheoretica 55 (4):357-375.
Tom Settle (1996). Six Things Popper Would Like Biologists Not to Ignore: In Memoriam, Karl Raimund Popper, 1902–1994. Biology and Philosophy 11 (2):141-159.
David N. Stamos (1996). Popper, Falsifiability, and Evolutionary Biology. Biology and Philosophy 11 (2):161-191.
David L. Hull (1999). The Use and Abuse of Sir Karl Popper. Biology and Philosophy 14 (4):481-504.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads40 ( #82,339 of 1,725,164 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #110,393 of 1,725,164 )
How can I increase my downloads?