Editing The Logic of Scientific Discovery

{{short description|1959 book by Karl Popper}}
{{Infobox book
| name             = The Logic of Scientific Discovery
| title_orig       = Logik der Forschung
| translator       = 
| image            = File:The Logic of Scientific Discovery (German edition).jpg
| caption          = Cover of the first edition
| author           = [[Karl Popper]]
| illustrator      = 
| cover_artist     = Dibakar Das
| country          = 
| language         = German
| series           = 
| subject          = [[Philosophy of science]]
| publisher        = [[Julius Springer]]
| publisher2       = [[Hutchinson (publisher)|Hutchinson & Co]]
| pub_date         = 1934
| english_pub_date = 1959
| media_type       = Print
| pages            = 513 (2002 & 2005 Routledge editions)
| isbn             = 3-1614-8410-X |isbn_note= (2005 German edition)<br>0-4152-7844-9 (2002 [[Psychology Press]] edition)<br>1-1344-7002-9 (2005 [[Routledge]] revised edition)
| oclc= 62448100
| preceded_by   = 
| followed_by   = 
}}
'''''The Logic of Scientific Discovery''''' is a 1959 book about the [[philosophy of science]] by the philosopher [[Karl Popper]]. Popper rewrote his book in English from the 1934 (imprint '1935') [[German language|German]] original, titled ''Logik der Forschung. Zur Erkenntnistheorie der modernen Naturwissenschaft'', which literally translates as, "Logic of Research: On the Epistemology of Modern Natural Science"'.<ref>{{cite book |last=Popper |first=Karl |author-link=Karl Popper |title=The Two Fundamental Problems of the Theory of Knowledge |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WHZ9AwAAQBAJ |editor=Hansen, Troels Eggers |others= Andreas Pickel, trans. |year=2014 |orig-date=1979 |publisher=[[Routledge]] |location=[[Abingdon-on-Thames]] |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=WHZ9AwAAQBAJ&dq=%22Logik+der+Forschung%22%22The+Logic+of+Research%22&pg=PA485 485] |isbn=978-1-13562676-1}}</ref>

==Summary==
 
Popper argues that science should adopt a methodology based on [[falsifiability]], because no number of experiments can ever prove a theory, but a reproducible experiment or observation can refute one. According to Popper: "non-reproducible single occurrences are of no significance to science. Thus a few stray basic statements contradicting a theory will hardly induce us to reject it as falsified. We shall take it as falsified only if we discover a reproducible effect which refutes the theory".<ref>{{cite book |last=Popper |first=Karl |year=2002 |orig-date=1959 |title=The Logic of Scientific Discovery |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0a5bLBbe_dMC |publisher=Routledge |location=Abingdon-on-Thames |isbn=0-41527843-0 |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=0a5bLBbe_dMC&dq=%22non-reproducible+single+occurrences+are+of+no+significance+to+science.+Thus+a+few+stray+basic+statements+contradicting+a+theory+will+hardly+induce+us+to+reject+it+as+falsified.+We+shall+take+it+as+falsified+only+if+we+discover+a+reproducible+effect+which+refutes+the+theory%2&pg=PA66 66]}}</ref>{{rp|66}} Popper argues that science should adopt a methodology based on "an ''asymmetry'' between [[Verificationism|verifiability]] and falsifiability; an asymmetry which results from the logical form of universal statements. For these are never derivable from singular statements, but can be contradicted by singular statements".<ref>Popper, Karl (2002). p. [https://books.google.com/books?id=0a5bLBbe_dMC&dq=%22is+based+upon+an+asymmetry+between+verifiability+and+falsifiability;+an+asymmetry+which+results+from+the+logical+form+of+universal+statements.%22%22For+these+are+never+derivable+from+singular+statements,+but+can+be+contradicted+by+singular+statements%22&pg=PA19 19].</ref>

==Reception==
The psychologist [[Harry Guntrip]] wrote that its publication "greatly stimulated the discussion of the nature of scientific knowledge", including by philosophers who did not completely agree with Popper, such as [[Thomas Kuhn]] and [[Horace Romano Harré]].<ref>{{cite journal
|last=Guntrip
|first=H
|author-link=Harry Guntrip
|date=September 1978
|title=Psychoanalysis and some scientific and philosophical critics: (Dr Eliot Slater, Sir Peter Medawar and Sir Karl Popper)
|journal=The British Journal of Medical Psychology
|volume=51
|issue=3
|pages=207–24
| pmid = 356870
|doi=10.1111/j.2044-8341.1978.tb02466.x
 }}</ref> The psychiatrist [[Carl Jung]], founder of [[analytical psychology]], valued the work. The biographer [[Vincent Brome]] recalls Jung remarking in 1938 that it exposed "some of the shortcomings of science".<ref>{{cite book |author=Brome, Vincent |title=Jung: Man and Myth |publisher=Paladin |location=London |year=1980 |page=14 |isbn=0-586-08361-8 }}</ref> The philosopher [[Paul Ricœur]] endorsed "procedures of invalidation" similar to Popper's criteria for falsifiability.<ref>{{cite book |author=Ricœur, Paul |title=Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge and New York |year=1988 |page=213 |isbn=0-521-28002-8 }}</ref> The historian [[Peter Gay]] described the work as "an important treatise in epistemology".<ref>{{cite book |author=Gay, Peter |title=Style in History: Gibbon, Ranke, Macaulay, Burckhardt |publisher=W. W. Norton & Company |location=New York |year=1988 |page=232 |isbn=0-393-30558-9 }}</ref> The philosopher [[Bryan Magee]] considered Popper's criticisms of [[logical positivism]] "devastating". In his view, Popper's most important argument against logical positivism is that, while it claimed to be a scientific theory of the world, its central tenet, the verification principle, effectively destroyed all of science.<ref>Magee, Bryan. ''Confessions of a Philosopher''. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1997, p. 46.</ref> The physicists [[Alan Sokal]] and [[Jean Bricmont]] argued that critiques of Popper's work have provoked an "irrationalist drift", and that a significant part of the problems that currently affect the philosophy of science "can be traced to ambiguities or inadequacies" in ''The Logic of Scientific Discovery''.<ref>Sokal, Alan. ''Beyond the Hoax: Science, Philosophy and Culture''. Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 182-183.</ref> The essayist [[Nassim Nicholas Taleb]], in his book ''[[The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable|The Black Swan]]'', mentions Popper's theory of falsification as a way to combat the effects of [[confirmation bias]], crediting his "insight concerning the fundamental, severe, and incurable unpredictability of the world."<ref>{{cite book
|last=Taleb
|first=Nassim Nicholas
|author-link=Nassim Nicholas Taleb
|date=2010
|title=The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable
|edition=2
|publisher=Random House Trade Paperback
|chapter=5
|isbn=9780679604181
}}</ref>

==Notes==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
* [https://www.routledge.com/The-Logic-of-Scientific-Discovery/Popper/p/book/9780415278447 English version publisher's website]
* [http://www.mohr.de/ German version publisher's website]
* [http://philotextes.info/spip/IMG/pdf/popper-logic-scientific-discovery.pdf The Logic of Scientific Discovery (Philotextes)]

{{Karl Popper}}
{{Positivism}}
{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Logic Of Scientific Discovery, The}}
[[Category:1934 non-fiction books|Logik der Forschung, Die]]
[[Category:1959 non-fiction books]]
[[Category:Analytic philosophy literature]]
[[Category:Books by Karl Popper]]
[[Category:German non-fiction books]]
[[Category:Philosophy of science literature]]