In this paper, I try to show how the ambition of William Bartley, the founder of comprehensively critical rationalism, can be realized, i.e. how critical rationalism can be comprehensive. I argue that the alleged paradox of comprehensively critical rationalism, formulated, among others, by Bartley himself, depends on a faulty understanding of criticizability. I therefore propose a new understanding of criticizability, and argue that under the new understanding there is no paradox of comprehensively critical rationalism. Finally, I try to explain how (...) critical rationalism can be comprehensive, i.e. without any concession to irrationalism, or to any dogmatic faith, including the faith in reason. (shrink)

Tento článok pojednáva o Watkinsovom útoku na Popperovu teóriu vedy . Watkins tvrdí, že Popperova teória pravdeblízkosti zavádza do PTV justifikacionistické a induktivistické prvky. Cieľom článku je ukázať nepravdivosť Watkinsovej obžaloby. V PTV niet žiadneho dobrého dôvodu pre žiadnu domnienku. Podobne, neexistuje tu ani žiadny „induktívny spôsob“ získavania domnienok.

Cognitive overlap between art and science can be found in the processes of learning through experience. What necessarily needs to be present in these processes are not good reasons in favor of what is known or learnt, but the following features: The first feature art and science have in common is the negativity of learning processes: What a cognizer C learns through experience is that her theories, expectations, attitudes, trials, etc. are wrong and should be abandoned in order to advance. (...) This leads us to the second common feature of art and science: if C is to err, and thus to learn through experience, she must create something in advance. It is further argued that C learns through experience due to causal relations between the environment and her sensations and beliefs. This cannot be accomplished, however, if C is not aware of the notion of objective truth. Empirical knowledge is social and public, yet its truth is not reducible to social agreement. More could be learnt about the learning through experience in art and science, if anyone showed that some of the features or relations proposed in this paper are not necessary for learning. (shrink)

[The neverending story of justification].

There are many variants of scientific realism but few of them account for the role of testing by means of experience in empirical sciences. Moreover, if combined with a kind of empiricism, they usually lead to antirealism. The paper aims to expose causes as well as results of this perplexity. The solution is to revise empiricism quite radically, and to set its marriage with realism on methodological rather than epistemological level.

The article distinguishes between subjectivist and objectivist interpretations of scientific method, links subjectivism with good reasons, and argues its uselessness for our understanding of science. It applies the distinction to the method of falsification, explains why objectivism regards falsification to be conjectural, immune to the Duhem–Quine thesis, and immune to the problem of underdetermination. It confronts the falsifying mode of inference with the fallacy of begging the question and with the paradox of inference, and suggests how modus tollens helps scientists (...) to find out that a tested theory is false, in spite of the fact that the falsity of the theory is asserted in its premises. (shrink)