Nursing Philosophy 4 (1):4-16 (2003)
AbstractScience seems to develop by inducing new knowledge from observation. However, it is hard to find a rational justification for induction. Popper offers one attempt to resolve this problem. Nursing theorists have tended to ignore or reject Popper, often on the false belief that he is a logical positivist (and hence hostile to qualitative research). Logical positivism claims that meaningful sentences containing any empirical content should ultimately be reducible to simple, observation statements. Popper refutes positivism by showing that there are no such simple statements. He is not a positivist. For Popper, the scientist begins with problems and puts forward trial solutions. These are subjected to rigorous testing aimed at falsifying them. A new theoretical position is then reached in which the scientist knows either that the trial solutions are false or that they have not yet been falsified. Science is characterized by the fact that it tests its ideas through attempted falsification. Nonscience tests its ideas through attempted refutation. Nursing theory is a mixture of science and non-science. Popper’s method requires rigorous testing of theory in both realms. As such, some nursing theory should be discarded. Popper’s view faces at least two important criticisms. One is that a scientist can always reject an apparent falsification by instead altering some auxiliary hypothesis (e.g. denying the accuracy of the falsifying observation). Popper can deal with this argument by saying that defence of a theory in this way will eventually break down if the theory is false. The second criticism is that Popper’s method does ultimately draw upon induction. This criticism is true, but his method can be usefully adapted. An adapted from of Popper’s philosophy of science provides a good basis for nursing theory.
Similar books and articles
Thoughts on Political Sources of Karl Popper’s Philosophy of Science.Struan Jacobs - 1999 - Journal of Philosophical Research 24:445-457.
A refutation of pure conjecture.Timothy Cleveland - 1997 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 28 (1):55-81.
Traditional rationality vs. a tradition of criticism: A criticism of Popper's theory of the objectivity of science. [REVIEW]JohnR Wettersten - 1978 - Erkenntnis 12 (3):329 - 338.
The problem of induction and Karl popper’s hypothetico-deductive methodology: A critical evaluation.Oseni Taiwo Afisi - unknown
I. C. Jarvie: The republic of science: The emergence of Popper's social view of science 1935–1945,.reviewed John Wettersten - 2006 - Philosophy of Science 73 (1):108-121.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
The myth of induction in qualitative nursing research.Elisabeth Bergdahl & Carina M. Berterö - 2015 - Nursing Philosophy 16 (2):110-120.
Transgressing the boundaries of science: Glazer, scepticism, and Emily's experiment.Thomas Cox - 2004 - Nursing Philosophy 5 (1):75-78.
References found in this work
A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to Introduce the Experimental Method of Reasoning Into Moral Subjects.David Hume & D. G. C. Macnabb (eds.) - 1738 - Collins.
Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.Karl Raimund Popper - 1962 - London, England: Routledge.