Audioburst Search

17 Burst results for "Karl Popper"

"karl popper" Discussed on Serious Inquiries Only

Serious Inquiries Only

05:48 min | 3 weeks ago

"karl popper" Discussed on Serious Inquiries Only

"Network new show giving him airtime? It's not because we want to hear both sides of the debate. You want to hear both sides of the debate. Get real scientists on. Don't get the guy who played Chachi on happy days or don't let me Jenny McCarthy was interviewed. On again I believe it also wasn't. I'm trying to dump on CNN but I believe it was CNN spoke. For over an hour about her view that vaccines are dangerous, and if you don't know who Jenny McCarthy is, she is a D. List actress. with a horrible string of movies. and. She thinks she knows better than actual scientists about the efficacy of vaccines. Why are we getting her a platform or we don't give everybody a platform. So why are we giving her a platform? And people again if I, ask why we'll say well, even if she's wrong, just getting a false leave out there, it will help us understand the truth better This seems to be just empirically false. What happens is people. See this and thank all I. Guess That's a defensible view. Would it be on television if it's not? Yeah, I think most terrifyingly in your article you cite research that says just being exposed to a false belief increases the likelihood that someone will believe it. As evidence for the mistake of mills, naive conception of rationality, and it seems if I'm understanding it correctly right, this is what leads to or your claim, your view that there should be a fiduciary responsibility on the part of these institutions to have provisions of of just access to avoid the sort of dangerousness that could result from someone just hearing Jenny McCarthy on any of these talk shows, and assuming one just the credibility that's being led to her means there some legitimacy to her opinion, but even if that doesn't happen, there's just a danger in being exposed to views that are wildly wrong. I know that she would agree with everything. I said but There's an article in the conversation by a Professor Lisa. Fauzi Oh. Unbelievable news it again, and you might think it's true for in two thousand sixteen, and she gives the links to the research on this, and that's precisely right that if you keep hearing something, even if you're told when you hear it that it's false, it increases the pop probability that you believe it. Just as A random example I remember when I was I, think in high school one of. My favorite urban legends, but we didn't think it was an urban legend was that scientists could not explain why bumblebees can fly. And I remember just being fast by that I. isn't that using? You'd think we'd know how to do that, but it turns out you can't. And it turns out there is this is completely falls. It's just an urban legend, but now that I've set bat I would not be surprised at all. If we start hearing people saying well, you know what in fact I just can't explain how even bumblebees can fly. because it turns out statistically if you repeat something, even if you identified as a falsehood, people are inclined to believe it's just a psychological fact about. Yeah I I love that one I've heard that one a lot. A lot of times people do site. According to scientists, bumblebees shouldn't be able to fly as though science means you like okay. We've done all the modeling of Bumblebee. And? We've determined that they can't fly like you don't just start with an observation. I, the you know I found that really funny. Yeah! I was just going to ask you if you know to maybe slightly defend mill. Seem like he wouldn't have as you said he wouldn't have defended this to be used for platforming more about speech, because I feel like you could easily take his argument to an absurd extreme by just saying okay, what if you have a newspaper and it's one hundred percent false claims. Would that be like a useful newspaper kind of thing and I have to imagine even Millwood said that would be a stupid way to run a newspaper, but am I wrong yet? No I think that's right and I think it's I mean I think mill. This is another way we can approach this issue in some people pointed this out. Insofar as MEL's approach works, it works when you have people who are arguing sincerely and are making a genuine effort to get at the truth. And a number of people including like Tra has a great essay about Antisemitism that makes the point I'm GonNa make, but also a pauper, although Karl Popper is not one of my favorite philosophers. Overall, he's got a nice account of what he calls the paradox of tolerance, and what in different ways what Sir Tra and popper Mrs probably the first time anyone cited Sar Tra and pauper in the same sentence by the way. What. But, with a with a bullet, point out is some people you argue with just don't care about the truth, and so Sir Tra made his great point about Anti Semites, and he says though tell outright lies about Jews and then when they're pushed on. Say, I'm just Jokin. You take seriously about, and we see this all the time with a lot of racist discourse, especially on the Internet now Sandra. Writing before the Internet was remarkably precinct about this people just going playing with the truth. They know they don't have to take truth seriously because you take through seriously. And if they can just flood the discourse with falsehoods uncertainty, they went. And Popper makes the same point. It causes the paradox of tolerance that yet you have to tolerate..

Jenny McCarthy Sar Tra Karl Popper CNN Chachi fiduciary Sandra Professor D. List Millwood MEL
"karl popper" Discussed on Science Salon

Science Salon

05:03 min | 4 months ago

"karl popper" Discussed on Science Salon

"But I recognize that if you don't reform in time if you don't adapt to social change in time then you provoke a revolution. You can compare France Britain. People have been doing this for a long time. You know England in one thousand nine hundred was nothing like England. In eighteen hundred it had become industrial urban and though there were revolutionary movements they were pretty easily put down because the English elites from gay then in eighteen thirty two and the first before Mac than the second reform act in eighteen sixties that gave the vote to the majority of eventually of men. They didn't give to women until later but And France had a much harder time adapting to the industrial pollution. After the French Revolution. There are other evolutions is eighteen thirty. There was one in eighteen forty eight. It was win. Anything seventy seventy one continued resistance in so it's possible to adapt to change. The United States is done except for the issue of race and slavery pretty well in meeting the challenges of Industrialization. When that doesn't happen then you have a potential for revolution and then if the moderates lose power we're screwed extremist take power than we're in really big trouble and that's what. I want to say and the extremists can be on the right. They could be on the left But I'm convinced middle of the road liberal liberal in the largest sense classical liberal. Yeah I mean I I have. Times voted for Republicans at Other Times for Democrats my colleagues considering quite conservative. But you're remember what I said about Burke. Yes the conservative. But he wasn't a reactionary right. He didn't believe that the monarchy was divine. And you should have. The kind of monarchy lead the fourteenth adding. He liked the British system with the parliament. So I I believe that you can't throw everything out and started you because the that Lisa disaster. Yeah here's what I wrote on the top of your chapter there. Poppers paradox of tolerance. Karl Popper N- is a book on the Open Society if we're tolerant of the extremists in the intolerant people then they can come to power. It opens the door for them yet. We Wanna be tolerant well in a well-balanced system. That's all right. They were fascists. Were Nazi sympathizers in England. Some of the leaders at the start of World War Two but until then they were allowed to talk in an. That's all right. If it wasn't for the war they would have been allowed to keep on talking so it's certainly acceptable to tolerate the kind of speech. You don't like the danger is not in being tolerant. The danger is when reform moderate reform and moderate liberals weather. More classical ones who are now called. Conservatives aren't tower a were people slightly to the left or entire if moderate reformers fail then the extremist become more dangerous. And that's that's really the message young. It's not that we should repress anyone who says what we don't like your member when Nazis paraded do not season in a suburb of Chicago. There was this big issue that was mostly Jewish suburb. Should we allow this so skokie Illinois right with the defendant him right exactly and the ACLU was right? What's dangerous is if we have a situation where there's so much frustration that those kinds of movement actually come close to getting power right trump. No I this idea that you know mine. Cops should be banned and people shouldn't read it. No no people should read it because it's a. It's a lesson for us to read extremist literature. So we know what they're thinking. It's actually so boring. I know it's a bad read I know sterile. But you can read some passages in. It's certainly worth reading some passages. Yeah because you see. His Oak is all right. You explained right for juice or Russia. Those are the two big things journey needs to expand. It needs to conquer Russia right. We have to get rid. Jews Daniel thanks so much for coming on the show and especially for writing the book. You say you want a revolution. You hung a question mark on there like that radical ideal idealism and its tragic consequences congratulations grade. Thanks for doing it. Thank you for having.

Burke England France Mac Karl Popper Russia United States Chicago ACLU Lisa Britain Daniel Illinois
"karl popper" Discussed on Thanks Be To Pod

Thanks Be To Pod

04:49 min | 7 months ago

"karl popper" Discussed on Thanks Be To Pod

"Associate pastor who has insisted that the resurrection needed to be literal. There's like it is absolutely not literal and I'm not preaching from my bullpen but like the beauty of being able to be in an environment where on Easter. I'm GonNa Preach that resurrection the spiritual resurrection. But I have in my community. People who are staunch conservative Orthodox people who just love being an environment that offers them multiple perspective and then my associate pastor is going to step up next week and preach some message. That is GonNa make the theological hair on the back of my neck. Stand up but it's fine because that's what the space is meant to be a place where we're all doing our best to articulate this thing that none of us can accurately articulate talking about the divine. For God's sake it's like you can't none of us ceus Lewis says All of our words are like flaming arrows. That never hit the target. Like we're all GonNa fall short so let's just create environments where creativity and expression and diverse views are allowed and again. I don't mean to be hitting us on our liberal side so much but I just feel like so many progressive churches are so open to letting all sorts of different progressive perspectives be allowed included at Lakewood turn over in their grave. If a conservative voice ever spoke and I think at Michigan gathering the thing that we have that unique is my associate pastor and some of my other. Stock numbers are real conservative in their theology By their because because they're allowed to speak. There's this beautiful tension in our community And I do think the last word on that I'll just say is I think on social issues it's actually more importance. We aligned there than it is to be aligned on theological issue right Our entire team. I mean my associates. A bisexual woman And so oh were aligned on those issues so that when inclusion questions come up we all have general understanding and we do draw boundaries to say what kind of ideological logical things can be said from the pulpit but theologically. I think that's where our creativity and expensive nece needs to be embraced and I think that's what makes people want to come to our church right so there's like a there's like a baseline right I mean there's a baseline you're on the same page to a degree but there's is this. There's there's apart from that there is this space where there is diversity. I but I guess when it boils down to like you're not going to hire a pastor. Who is Una firming going to be a part of your community But there are in fact. Yeah Yeah I think I was going to say like there. Are these third way. Churches That that exist and I actually. I think even gospel of inclusion. I speak pretty harshly against that because I don't think that works. I don't think having I've never seen it work. Where are you hire? A non affirming pastor and affirming pastor. And you try to live in that tension and create a long-term community And in my book the Gospel are conclusion. I talk about the paradox of intolerance that Karl popper a philosopher talked about. which is if you're if you're going to be inclusive? True inclusion also demands that you do have boundaries because radical inclusion means there are no boundaries at all which means that you can. You're going to create a space. That's not helpful for anything And I think in progressive churches in our desire to be inclusive. I think it's important that we draw again. It's the exact opposite of what conservative conservative churches to we need to say. Theology is free game. I think like we're all trying our best to figure this out and everything's allowed here but when it comes comes to social policy and that means both in the Church and society I do think the institution needs to draw some lines and admission gathering. Of course we would say We've had these conversations with staff what happens if somebody walks in our church with a make-america-great-again hat What's interesting is our staff? We all kind of agreed we have to have somebody go up to that person and say hey got isn't allowed in this environment because it makes people feel unsafe but then the flip side of coin. which does it's a weird tension if somebody walked in with Bernie Sanders shirt? Would we do the same thing. And the answer is no. But that's because we've drawn John Ideological boundary. I mean we've decided that there is a political social line that can't be crossed for the safety and the affirmation of our community So I think inclusions a messy thing when it's lived out in churches period but I would just always lean on the side of social policies to protect actual people and theology tree game forever.

John Ideological boundary Bernie Sanders Lakewood Karl popper Michigan
"karl popper" Discussed on The Art of Manliness

The Art of Manliness

02:51 min | 1 year ago

"karl popper" Discussed on The Art of Manliness

"I need to say something more about this city because I have a somewhat individual take him on on the city called Kalisz the noble and beautiful city. So let me say this, the logistician and philosophers scientists the British thinker Karl pop. Wrote a book during the second World War called the open society and its enemies, and it wasn't attack until talibanism in in this book Popper argues that the regime of philosopher kings in Plato's Republic is a totalitarian regime. That's the one called Columbus. And I have to say, I agree with Karl Popper. So let me tell you first of all this is a very strange thing. Because Socrates presents it he expresses admiration for this regime, which yeah, you read it, and it sounds terrible. You have no privacy. That's right. You don't have your own family. Like, you don't even know if your kids or your kids. That's right. It's terrible. Right. So there there are a lot of interesting levels here. But let me say a little bit about the origin of this as I said glaucoma tells this myth of guy. Jeez. Ring ring of invisibility, and there is a deep problem here. I believe that this myth actually is a response to something that his relative is older cousin craziest who was the leader of the thirty tyrants wrote in a play it's called the Sisyphus fragment. And in this little story about Sisyphus crisis tells the following story that looks a lot like the story Glauber until before he tells his ring meth, and that is this people were. Lawless and unjust until laws were made. But then people figured out that you could commit injustice in secret and criteria says and by the way, craziest was a radical thinker. That's when human beings, invented the gods and said that the gods know, everything we do even secret injustice K, and this myth ends with credit saying, and that's how human beings put an end to injustice because they got people to believe in these all seeing gods. And by the way, Zeus in Homer, for example, is said to wander the cities and observe the unjust EADS of human beings. Well, if Glock kind is right about the ring meth, what needs to be said here, by the way, is that the guy who discovers the ring an ancestor of a fella named guy. Geez. Isn't afraid of the gods. He doesn't believe in them. And he goes under the ground, and he steals a ring from a corpse, which is of very impetuous thing to do. Grave robbery was a very serious sin. If you will. So what what that story is is pointing to is that those people who don't actually believe in an all knowing God will continue to be unjust in commit injustice in secret. The only way to stop that kind of injustice is therefore to design a city in which everyone is spied on at all times..

Karl Popper Karl pop Socrates robbery Columbus
"karl popper" Discussed on The Science Show

The Science Show

05:25 min | 1 year ago

"karl popper" Discussed on The Science Show

"So you started off as a straight philosopher wondering about the thickness of thing and the nature of objects and interactions, Sean defining things using language. You didn't know noted. So I started off as person wondering about whether or not there is such a thing as scientific expertise about how to organize a country how to run in a corner me how we should live and that was very much informed by my experience of coming of age with the collapse of Soviet system. Will of course, communism was supposed to be scientific, you know, you just add electrically Lennon said I think he was. And here you are two hundred anniversary of marks. And there was quite a little of science stated that not necessarily probably involve. But what did you find to be the role of science and such a situation making community making progress possible? Well, by the time, I started paying attention. We had new experts university of Chicago, and I coming to Russia and telling us how to run economy properly gloss. Also experts about what it means to be a healthy society. And they were all western that were homegrown as well. My experiences informed by this intense uncertainty, which is a teenage experience quintessentially except that all adults around me. Also didn't know how to live, and it is that tremendous and certainty about what it means to be a good community. What it means to organize? Knowledge making that got me interested in philosophy of science hell ju- think scientists should go about effectively and efficiently to decide how to investigate the natural world. What should be the starting point? You think there is a space for very different kinds of science. There is a space for signs that is driven by the priorities of the community that enables it in. There is certainly a responsibility for scientists to respond to engage with the problems that are ongoing end. Scientists also have responsibility to be generally curious there is no single formula for science. But there is definitely a scientific responsibility for making knowledge that relieves suffering that much I believe I see. So where you think scientists or even the public go wrong and understanding what? Make of science the difference. Between fact, if you like in value, lots of places scientific methods is fascinating question because it seems like whenever we try to formulate what it is a we keep finding examples where scientists violated that formula, and yet still came up with something valuable. So for example, Karl Popper tried to make a formula that signs should only aim at falsification. And I don't think this is a very good formula. But you asked about science and values here, I think the really long standing and important caricature or a myth that we need to address is the idea that science should be objective in the sense of value freedom where value freedom means that signs is in the business of discovering factual claims rather than evaluative claims, so. So on this vision of value freedom, of course, it's okay to use ethics to make sure your experiments do not hurt people or press people that it's fine to respond to priorities of the day. But once you chain writing knowledge this knowledge needs to be about what is the case rather than what should be the case. And I think if we look at a lot of life sciences social sciences Medical Sciences, we find that that sense of value. Freedom is violates it, for example, nowadays a lot of our colleagues in the psychological sciences. Are speaking out signing statements about the horrible effect on children of child attention detention in camps when their parents are arrested for crossing the border illegally. That's the biggest one twelve thousand children are currently in detention. In USA, our colleagues in psychology saying that children cannot possibly flourish when they are separated forcibly from their families. And what are they saying when they're making this claim are they making factual claims won't quite obviously not are making claims about what arrangements hurt children and in doing so they're making a sumptious about child wellbeing or about in general, what human wellbeing is this is incredibly valuable, and this is the responsible thing to do. And I am glad and grateful to my psychology colleagues for bringing their knowledge to stand up for these voiceless kids..

social sciences Medical Scienc Sean Karl Popper university of Chicago Russia USA
"karl popper" Discussed on The Science Show

The Science Show

05:25 min | 1 year ago

"karl popper" Discussed on The Science Show

"So you started off as a straight philosopher wondering about the thickness of thing and the nature of objects and interactions, Sean defining things using language. You didn't know noted. So I started off as person wondering about whether or not there is such a thing as scientific expertise about how to organize a country how to run in a corner me how we should live and that was very much informed by my experience of coming of age with the collapse of Soviet system. Will of course, communism was supposed to be scientific, you know, you just add electrically Lennon said I think he was. And here you are two hundred anniversary of marks. And there was quite a little of science stated that not necessarily probably involve. But what did you find to be the role of science and such a situation making community making progress possible? Well, by the time, I started paying attention. We had new experts university of Chicago, and I coming to Russia and telling us how to run economy properly gloss. Also experts about what it means to be a healthy society. And they were all western that were homegrown as well. My experiences informed by this intense uncertainty, which is a teenage experience quintessentially except that all adults around me. Also didn't know how to live, and it is that tremendous and certainty about what it means to be a good community. What it means to organize? Knowledge making that got me interested in philosophy of science hell ju- think scientists should go about effectively and efficiently to decide how to investigate the natural world. What should be the starting point? You think there is a space for very different kinds of science. There is a space for signs that is driven by the priorities of the community that enables it in. There is certainly a responsibility for scientists to respond to engage with the problems that are ongoing end. Scientists also have responsibility to be generally curious there is no single formula for science. But there is definitely a scientific responsibility for making knowledge that relieves suffering that much I believe I see. So where you think scientists or even the public go wrong and understanding what? Make of science the difference. Between fact, if you like in value, lots of places scientific methods is fascinating question because it seems like whenever we try to formulate what it is a we keep finding examples where scientists violated that formula, and yet still came up with something valuable. So for example, Karl Popper tried to make a formula that signs should only aim at falsification. And I don't think this is a very good formula. But you asked about science and values here, I think the really long standing and important caricature or a myth that we need to address is the idea that science should be objective in the sense of value freedom where value freedom means that signs is in the business of discovering factual claims rather than evaluative claims, so. So on this vision of value freedom, of course, it's okay to use ethics to make sure your experiments do not hurt people or press people that it's fine to respond to priorities of the day. But once you chain writing knowledge this knowledge needs to be about what is the case rather than what should be the case. And I think if we look at a lot of life sciences social sciences Medical Sciences, we find that that sense of value. Freedom is violates it, for example, nowadays a lot of our colleagues in the psychological sciences. Are speaking out signing statements about the horrible effect on children of child attention detention in camps when their parents are arrested for crossing the border illegally. That's the biggest one twelve thousand children are currently in detention. In USA, our colleagues in psychology saying that children cannot possibly flourish when they are separated forcibly from their families. And what are they saying when they're making this claim are they making factual claims won't quite obviously not are making claims about what arrangements hurt children and in doing so they're making a sumptious about child wellbeing or about in general, what human wellbeing is this is incredibly valuable, and this is the responsible thing to do. And I am glad and grateful to my psychology colleagues for bringing their knowledge to stand up for these voiceless kids..

social sciences Medical Scienc Sean Karl Popper university of Chicago Russia USA
"karl popper" Discussed on Science Friday

Science Friday

04:17 min | 1 year ago

"karl popper" Discussed on Science Friday

"And that includes Gerda Gerda at this point is already at Princeton, and she's looking at her formative for a blobs and she's thinking what they're saying, what the Alvarez's are saying. It just can't be true, and here's why according to the Alvarez's when the sunlight cuts out, there's a mass extinction all over the world, all kinds of species die not just the dinosaurs, but big species, small species, microscopic things like the formative FRA Curtis blobs and if the Alvarez or right, the extinction of all these species is sudden it's an apocalypse all over the world happening. Geologically speaking pretty much all at once. But when Curtis Gans were layers of rock, she doesn't see a sudden apocalypse. Her blobs are dying out gradually over an extended period, a gradual extinction. That in itself is a contradiction of what the Alvarez's. Were saying, but that's not good as only objection. Gerda says her blobs. She sees them starting to decline well before the Alvarez's magic big rock from space hits. And so from work Gerda standing, it seems like yes, there was something that was killing off a lot of species at the end of the Cretaceous, but could you really say that this killer was a rock from space. If by the time it hits, they are already dying. By nineteen Eighty-eight. Gird is ready to unveil her findings and she finds the opportunity. A bunch of planetary scientists have organized a conference in snowbird, Utah. It's a lot of space. People who really dig this threat from space idea and go decides she's going to head over and like, you know, show them that they're wrong. I saw they would look at the data and see maybe we have to rethink good admits in retrospect, maybe she was a little naive going into this. He'll just a tad. She remembers throwing up her. I lied if something like gradual, mass extinction emphasis on gradual Sentosa guests. These all impactful and people immediately started lining up even before my introduction was given, and the line keeps growing. Gerda remembers that by the time her talk is over there about thirty people lined up and they are all they are to tell her that she's wrong. She doesn't know what she's talking about. She remembers shouting. So somewhere along the line, you probably had. Very good science teacher tell you the disagreement is all part of the scientific process. Bright. She might not have mentioned the shouting, but in theory, descent, even impolite descent can be part of that push and pull that moved science forward. The philosopher Karl Popper according to him, the Mark of a true scientific theory is not that you can prove it, it's that you could disprove it with the right eminence. And so your job, if you are a scientist with an empty theory is to try to knock that theory down, try to test it in tested. Again, try to disprove it and if it's still standing, it might even be true, but now time for some real talk, generally speaking, that's not what size scientists in the lab or in the field or something. We're not thinking, I'm here I'm going to I'm here to falsify some theory. You're trying to explore your own area of research and is a retired geologist who wrote a book about the Dino debates and he says, look, scientists are human beings. They're gonna get attached to some ideas. They're not really going to want to knock down their own theories and that's enough normal. But there is an antidote which is working in communities. Collectively, scientists will compete with each other, tell each other. They're wrong knocked down a week idea to the quote great disappointment of its proponents and to the advancement of science overall. That sounds pretty good. Did I say that you know what I started saying later is more specifically, is science is better than scientists? Do you want elaborate? No, that's it. He does though science overcomes the weaknesses, the foibles, the mistakes, the bias duties of individual scientists, scientific disagreement really did some good work actually in the Dyno debates, you know, after the Alvarez came in with their flashy theory, people were trying to either knock it down if they didn't like it or prop it up if they did like it..

Gerda Gerda Alvarez Gird scientist Curtis Gans snowbird Karl Popper Utah Princeton geologist
"karl popper" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

04:16 min | 2 years ago

"karl popper" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"So. They're, they're not governed by pass concerns when they encounter people that are not done Yang, they can just completely manipulate them the they sort of stand outside of that path. Humans engineered to no longer have preferences to only be computers sort of. Yeah, yeah, pretty much. But that's the other thing. Maybe what we need is an advanced hybrid computer, some sort of, you know, super AI. They could do all of the science that could that could be science without the human concerns. Yeah, but we don't have that right now. We just have the humans with some help from the computers. Right. So today, the main topic that we're gonna be talking about is the idea of empiricism and falsify ability in science. We're going to get to what those what falsify ability means in a second, but also about whether we have entered a phase in science where there is room for a concept known as post imperialism. And if that's crazy, do you, we will explain what the arguments are in just a bit. But we should bring it back to the history of this demarcation problem. How do you separate the science from the pseudoscience? And one of the most common answers given by scientists today would be traceable back to the twentieth century philosopher of science, Karl Popper. So who who was Karl Popper? Popper was an Austrian British philosopher generally regarded as one of the twentieth century's greatest philosophers of science, and he defied demarcation is the the chief problem in the philosophy of science. Again, how to judge science separated from from pseudoscience separate the sin from the virtue here straw, really firm line in the sand that we can stick by and judge everything accordingly. And he thought he came up with an answer to the problem, right? Yeah. Yeah. He thought he came up with a pretty solid answer and really reading about his life like he stuck to his guns. Like towards the end of his life. You know, he had had plenty of critics who said, actually, this doesn't work or blah, blah. We'll get into the specifics in a second, but he was. Voted and he would. He spent his time either clarifying what he had said or shooting down his critics. So yeah, he's he's, he stuck to his guns on this, but what was his answer? How can you tell the difference between science and pseudoscience? What qualifies something as real science? Yeah, what is what is the litmus test, right? The answer he gave is falsify ability. So what does that mean? So according to Popper in order for a proposition right or wrong to be scientific in nature, it has to be falsifiable meaning you have to be able to describe empirical results, test results in the real world that would show the proposition to be false. And then in order to to strengthen theory to build confidence in, you have to continually seek these exceptions to your rule. You have to keep looking for ways to break your theory and you have to fail to attain them over and over. Yeah. And this means there has to be such thing as a critical test for any. Given proposition proposition in order for it to be scientific in nature, right? And so let's give some examples in in science. Just throw it a theory, what the rule is and then explain how, how could you falsify it? So here's one Einstein's special theory of relativity, says the speed of light and a vacuum is the same for all observers. Now, if you could get people in spaceships moving different speeds to measure the speed of light and evacuating, get different results than special relativity is wrong. It's falsified. The theory is in principle falsifiable. Another one would be how about common descent, common descent says that all life on earth is related and it evolved from single organism known as the last universal common ancestor or Luca. So if we looked at the genomes of plants and animals and bacteria all the different kingdoms of life, and we found that they had all completely different genes and use different genetic tools to accomplish the same basic survival tasks like say, matab. Title, ISM metabolising sugars or something. This would probably falsify common descent, who would make it look like the kingdoms of life had multiple different origins, but that's not what we find. So there is support for common descent, and here's one example that's often was often touted by Popper himself..

Karl Popper Yang Einstein
"karl popper" Discussed on WHCP Community Radio 101.5 FM

WHCP Community Radio 101.5 FM

01:52 min | 2 years ago

"karl popper" Discussed on WHCP Community Radio 101.5 FM

"Other way around and that's a good example of a band where you know you're taking an archetype in your twisting at around in some way making a whole new solution and picasso if you've seen his painting lay de moselle devon y'all it's not a realistic view of human figures uh limbs are distorted and transformed and exaggerated in different shapes same reality we all live but eight transform version of it well indication the apollo astronauts i would i would call it ingenuity right at you know yankee ingenuity or even you know southern ingenuity if that exists in from the south i would say it does uh but you know for me that the question is what's the difference between ingenuity and creativity came did i think there's none i think what they did was exactly inactive creativity in this sense that they're taking in everything they know about the module and how it all operates and then they're having to create new versions of things and say well what if we did that what if we did that and evaluate those hypotheses and me one of the really striking things about the human brain which as far as we know no other animal species does is were able to create possibilities and evaluate them the philosopher karl popper said this is what allows or hypotheses to die in our stead so we don't have to try everything out physically like other animals but we can try them out mentally and this is what the engineers at nasa had to do and the end result you might look at me say that's ingenuity but what got them there were these basic cognitive routines which you know one of the things i always struck us his when other animals do that why don't cows get to the moon it's not like we're racing them to get there um son had been over the moon good point.

karl popper nasa
"karl popper" Discussed on MonsterTalk

MonsterTalk

01:50 min | 2 years ago

"karl popper" Discussed on MonsterTalk

"He could see if the literature survey supports my suspicion what concerns me is that the uthr is unfalsifiable we've talked about this before using karl popper's idea that in order for an idea to be considered scientific it needs to be testicle and falsifiable the you t h by its very nature is untested testicle it is the invisible magic dragging the carl sagan talked about in his book the demon 100 world as such i hope that serious enthusiasts of the paranormal encrypt zoological will continue to reject it as the research dead end it truly is muster talk has an official podcast of skeptic magazine the views expressed in the show or those of myself my respective guests and did not necessarily reflect the opinions of skeptic magazine or the skeptic society we hope you enjoyed this episode of monster talk each episode we strive to bring you the best in monster related content with the focus on bringing scientific skepticism into the conversation if you enjoy monster talk we now have a variety of ways to support the show all with convenient links at monster talk dot org ford slash support that's monster talk dot org forge slash support dare we have links to our patriotic pages as well the donation button a great way to support the show is tobias books from our amazon monster talk wishlist which directly helps us with our research we love used books very much who don't feel compelled to buy new ones and we love kindle and we can share a digital library with each other finally without spending any money at all you can support is by leaving a positive review at i tunes or wherever you get your podcasts positive reviews help keep is visible in iteens which is a great way to help us find you listeners and please share our show on your favorite social media platforms i hope you enjoy this episode muster talk theme music is by pete stealing monkeys thank you so much for listening.

karl popper skeptic magazine kindle iteens carl sagan official amazon social media pete
"karl popper" Discussed on Xtra Sports Radio 1300 AM

Xtra Sports Radio 1300 AM

01:53 min | 2 years ago

"karl popper" Discussed on Xtra Sports Radio 1300 AM

"It so that i could track my spending but i can see what i'm spending my money on i feel more conscious of what i'm spending and i feel like i have the reins more than i did before if you wanna take were first steps to financial wellness use the red key key bank member fdic five dindigul your period number two the appalachia kapil's all tied up in one the faceoff is gordy come outside the avalanche showed here brought to you by grocery pickup rural plastic surgery gerald glass plastic surgeons go to beautiful lead on downloads beautiful merely god god what is down capture albuquerque slammed into the avalanche sold over the top of the net picked a poignant it wields look the board but not out juice keeps it a lot sensiti rishaad now alfred karl popper down never pass it again thanks to the border blake gobert looked at out cook up three hit caps good to us every president got the top supplemented quite cold sick for the half ford sold laser work on an hour battle for those poptarts goes to the point for juice back judge john lewis the borjal or try to give it up and take it away your they come horry they can get numbers down the right wing for trouble soggy at a walk let us say by hope here the netti ooh put opportunity forty asteroid clearer seattle tried to kill high it hold me shortest filled up with just got a piece of over the top of his mass his shin it up into discouraged sure abdul majid your all short cook your comes com parral.

blake gobert president seattle appalachia gordy albuquerque alfred karl popper john lewis
"karl popper" Discussed on KHNR 690AM

KHNR 690AM

01:41 min | 2 years ago

"karl popper" Discussed on KHNR 690AM

"With less than a trader that unallocated of capital the various internal and external asset managers that just diversify diversify diversify mr soros does of plan a trade the billions that no belonged open society he just going to let that money flow out ever more and the society ever soros has lived under both the nazis and under the communist he's the dprk of karl popper as many people are i don't think he understands cropper i really don't uh he says he believes and liberal democracies but he actually does it he he might believe in it but what he does doesn't actually advance it he spend a lot of money the justice reform of the rule of law allegedly but it if it he spent a lot of money on equality anti discrimination but it isn't we spent a lot of money a journalism but it's not i do approve of his early childhood education investments in i do believe in a in a few things that he does but mostly it's misplaced because unlike the society he is not open to ideas he's very close mind and he's very lefty meanwhile the good news i told you yesterday that the uh the media would not cover the fall of rock as a victory for the donald trump inspired changing tactics and of course they didn't they spend all day trying to fan the flames of a very distasteful argument between president trump and gold star families apart which i will not have apart my view i've i've interviewed a number of gold star family i have two shows year devoted a separate fifa and i realized that there is no use to those arguments because incredible pain to every family who has lost a.

dprk karl popper donald trump fifa mr soros president
"karl popper" Discussed on KHNR 690AM

KHNR 690AM

01:38 min | 2 years ago

"karl popper" Discussed on KHNR 690AM

"Less the trader that unallocated of capital of the various internal and external asset managers egis diversify diversify diversify mr soros does it plan to trade the billions that now belonged open society he just going to let that money flow out ever more in the society beverage sorrow says lived under both the nazis and under the communist he's the dprk of karl popper as many people are i don't think he understands crawl popper i really don't uh he says he believes and liberal democracies but he actually does it b a might believe in it but what he does doesn't actually advance it he spent a lot of money the justice reform of the rule of law allegedly but it if it he spends a lot of money on equality anti discrimination but it isn't he spends a lot of money on journalism but it's not i do approve of his early childhood education investments and i do believe in a in a few things that he does but mostly it's misplaced because unlike the society he is not open to ideas he's very closeminded then he's very lefty we rob a good news i told you yesterday that the uh the media would not cover the fall of rock as a victory for the donald trump inspired change in tactics and of course they didn't they spend all day trying to fan the flames of a very distasteful argument between president trump and gold star families apart which i will not have apart but view i've i've interviewed a number of gold star families i have two shows year devoted a separate fifa and i realized that there's no use to those arguments they caused incredible pain.

dprk karl popper donald trump fifa mr soros president
"karl popper" Discussed on Little Atoms

Little Atoms

01:35 min | 2 years ago

"karl popper" Discussed on Little Atoms

"So i already mentioned this part about how the human brain is anatomically slightly different i mean the part that so he's been so interesting to me is that when we look at anibal brains it's essentially the same as ours and in fact in neuro science half the time is spent studying animal brains because they are so similar and so the question is why is that we're the only ones that have created civilizations and built great cities in um you one of the things you mentioned the book is that when you're flying over of forest and he looked down over it looks exactly the way did a million years ago under flying over london and you look at the window it's like a motherboard that's come up and it's all because of one single species on the planet so there's this expansion the cortex which i eat which i mentioned part of that is part of the experience should give us what's called the prefrontal cortex which is the part behind forehead and that allows us to unhook from our moments in space and time and think about what could be could you know it allows us to simulate as the um as the scientists karl popper put it it allows our hypotheses to die in our stead and so what this means is we can take in all the input from the world and survival what if it put these things go with this what affected than what if a crash these affect broke in half and so on and most of the ideas we come up with her garbage and occasionally there's one that's kanok good might work and that's all it takes is just a few good ideas there to start this this massive acceleration of what our species in the middle of that.

london karl popper million years
"karl popper" Discussed on The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast

The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast

01:48 min | 3 years ago

"karl popper" Discussed on The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast

"It lays the groundwork at least in the christian context for the eventual emergence of christ as i alluded to in my reading that story obviously has to be unpacked and unpacked and impact just like it has been for the last two thousand years it's also an indication here of well i would say the transmutation of sacrifice into an increasingly psychological form which has a development that we've tracked all the way through the old testament up to this particular point first acted out then represented in ritual those would be the rituals of sacrifice then laid out in story then turned into a psychological phenomena so that now we're capable of making sacrifices in abstraction right to conceptualise a future that we want to let go of the things that are stopping us from moving forward and to free ourselves from the chains of our original preconceptions and that's laid out in these old stories as the optimal pathway of being and there's a philosopher of science named karl popper very sensible and down to earth person who is talking about thinking in its nature and he was thought about thinking in a darwinian fashion said the purpose of thinking is too late your thoughts die instead of you it's a brilliant notion and so the idea is something like you can conjure up a representation of yourself you can conjure up a variety of potential representations of yourself into that in the future you can layout how those future representations of yourself are likely to prevail or fail you can coal the potential use in the future that will fail and then you can embody the ones that will succeed.

old testament karl popper two thousand years
"karl popper" Discussed on On Being with Krista Tippett

On Being with Krista Tippett

01:47 min | 3 years ago

"karl popper" Discussed on On Being with Krista Tippett

"And so when he came in exile one of his wishes was to meet with grit scientists amid widow karl popper with a greater quantum physicist then and then more and more with psychologist and neuroscientist so when disorder that some of them got the idea of creating that mind the left institute francisco varela great neuroscientist other mengele who is a former businessman orders chairman of mine alive to facilitate this title i was just to the bring them together and have this wonderful small scale dialogue five or six scientists maybe twenty observers and that was it but then it quickly turned out that the discussion were so lively saw enriching from both side there was not just coaching the dilemma they were also learning a lot from is kind of mind and data it becomes we bigger some public events start to happen that the first one rain at mit in was investing in st louis and was in two thousand three was acquired the groundbreaking of the thousand santana and his novel prices and so forth but also the idea of starting a research programme the because buddhism cossuta itself as it empirical approach of the functioning of the mind the mechanism of happiness and suffering and ansol empirical means in all we can set early work with scientists without any risk of feeling threatened by dad because something is false force was the problem with that so in two thousand following one of the meeting that was devoted to destructive emotions to first rental massive at participated.

karl popper physicist mengele chairman mit st louis santana francisco varela
"karl popper" Discussed on KELO

KELO

02:01 min | 3 years ago

"karl popper" Discussed on KELO

"The ternal principles of natural law this is so important as it applies to events happening today this is made in america this is american has like no other place on the face of the earth but a nation established on sound principles is not immune to attack even from its own citizens living tracks the thought of key progressive leaders and how they transformed american government herbert crowly theodore roosevelt woodrow wilson and others work to alter in many ways a badge and and the founding in favor of an ideological agenda broadly characterize has historical progress lin also demonstrate illustrates how the writings of four influential philosophers prepare the way for the progressive rejection of the founders principles rousseau heguo markson and conte were all hostile to fundamental republican ideas including the separation of powers and federalism in their writings particularly conte's advocacy of legal positive ism one discovers an ideological brew of in his livein calls it the vince stance on the shoulders of giants when he critiques the philosophies that informs progressive thought and exposes the justices and failures a progressive government the work of karl popper reveals just how dangerous hey goes teachings were popper argued that hechos nineteenthcentury history the system was the root of twentiethcentury totalitarianism in addition levin draws heavily on the work of isaiah berlin frederick hayek built milton freeman to critique the flawed premise sees and negative consequences of progressivism in the twentieth century for example incessant government regulation is undermine individual liberty in place financial burdens on all americans these bureaucratic institutions contrast sharply the principles of the founding elegantly stated in the declaration and protected by the constitution.

america lin conte karl popper levin theodore roosevelt woodrow wil vince frederick hayek milton freeman milton