The stove-popper controversy: rationalism or irrationalism
In this text, I will try to show some relevant aspects about the controversy Stove-Popper in wich the tension between Logia Positivism and Critic Rationalism is carried out. I start from Stove's position to attack Popper's anti-inductivism, and to achieve it, the author centers herself bas...
- Autores:
- Tipo de recurso:
- Fecha de publicación:
- 2021
- Institución:
- Universidad Católica de Pereira
- Repositorio:
- Repositorio Institucional - RIBUC
- Idioma:
- spa
- OAI Identifier:
- oai:repositorio.ucp.edu.co:10785/10820
- Acceso en línea:
- https://revistas.ucp.edu.co/index.php/paginas/article/view/2128
http://hdl.handle.net/10785/10820
- Palabra clave:
- Rights
- openAccess
- License
- Derechos de autor 2009 Revista Páginas
id |
RepoRIBUC_cbb0de9cac32ceeb5e6a0e7c132f55c9 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.ucp.edu.co:10785/10820 |
network_acronym_str |
RepoRIBUC |
network_name_str |
Repositorio Institucional - RIBUC |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
The stove-popper controversy: rationalism or irrationalismLa controversia stove-popper: racionalismo o irracionalismoIn this text, I will try to show some relevant aspects about the controversy Stove-Popper in wich the tension between Logia Positivism and Critic Rationalism is carried out. I start from Stove's position to attack Popper's anti-inductivism, and to achieve it, the author centers herself basically in two fundamental aspects: the first one shows the conception of Rationality as if it were possible to analyzed just from deductives points of view. The second one related to the affirmation about that science has only had progress from de pure Deductivism. The conception of Popper's rationality implies a strong Deductivism, and could not establish the affirmation of progress during the last centuries. In order to attack these aspects, the author tries to show that Popper's concept about rationality is richer and more complex than Stove's proposal, and on the other hand, shows that there is not a postulation of inferences of unobservable, from observable or from future facts starting from past facts.En este escrito trataré de mostrar algunos puntos relevantes de la controversia Stove-Popper en los que se hace clara la tensión entre el positivismo lógico y el racionalismo crítico. Se parte de la posición de Stove para atacar el antiinductivismo de Popper, para lo cual, el autor se centra básicamente en dos puntos claves: El primero muestra la concepción de racionalidad como si ésta sólo fuera posible de ser analizada desde puntos de vista deductivistas. El segundo con relación a la afirmación acerca de que la ciencia sólo ha tenido progresos desde el deductivismo puro. La concepción de racionalidad de Popper implica deductivismo fuerte y no podría hacer la afirmación de progreso durante los últimos siglos. Para atacar estos aspectos se intenta mostrar que el concepto de racionalidad de Popper es más complejo y rico de lo que Stove propone y, segundo, mostrar que no hay la postulación de inferencias de inobservables a partir de observables o de hechos futuros a partir de hechos pasados.Universidad Católica de Pereira2022-06-01T19:29:02Z2022-06-01T19:29:02Z2021-01-27Artículo de revistahttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1application/pdfhttps://revistas.ucp.edu.co/index.php/paginas/article/view/2128http://hdl.handle.net/10785/10820Revista Páginas; Núm. 82 (Dic., 2008); 25-380121-1633spahttps://revistas.ucp.edu.co/index.php/paginas/article/view/2128/1976Derechos de autor 2009 Revista Páginashttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.es_EShttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.es_ESinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2Arango Arias, Ana Lucíaoai:repositorio.ucp.edu.co:10785/108202025-01-27T19:23:15Z |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
The stove-popper controversy: rationalism or irrationalism La controversia stove-popper: racionalismo o irracionalismo |
title |
The stove-popper controversy: rationalism or irrationalism |
spellingShingle |
The stove-popper controversy: rationalism or irrationalism |
title_short |
The stove-popper controversy: rationalism or irrationalism |
title_full |
The stove-popper controversy: rationalism or irrationalism |
title_fullStr |
The stove-popper controversy: rationalism or irrationalism |
title_full_unstemmed |
The stove-popper controversy: rationalism or irrationalism |
title_sort |
The stove-popper controversy: rationalism or irrationalism |
description |
In this text, I will try to show some relevant aspects about the controversy Stove-Popper in wich the tension between Logia Positivism and Critic Rationalism is carried out. I start from Stove's position to attack Popper's anti-inductivism, and to achieve it, the author centers herself basically in two fundamental aspects: the first one shows the conception of Rationality as if it were possible to analyzed just from deductives points of view. The second one related to the affirmation about that science has only had progress from de pure Deductivism. The conception of Popper's rationality implies a strong Deductivism, and could not establish the affirmation of progress during the last centuries. In order to attack these aspects, the author tries to show that Popper's concept about rationality is richer and more complex than Stove's proposal, and on the other hand, shows that there is not a postulation of inferences of unobservable, from observable or from future facts starting from past facts. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-01-27 2022-06-01T19:29:02Z 2022-06-01T19:29:02Z |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
Artículo de revista http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.coar.fl_str_mv |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1 |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ucp.edu.co/index.php/paginas/article/view/2128 http://hdl.handle.net/10785/10820 |
url |
https://revistas.ucp.edu.co/index.php/paginas/article/view/2128 http://hdl.handle.net/10785/10820 |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
spa |
language |
spa |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.ucp.edu.co/index.php/paginas/article/view/2128/1976 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
Derechos de autor 2009 Revista Páginas https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.es_ES https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.es_ES info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Derechos de autor 2009 Revista Páginas https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.es_ES http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidad Católica de Pereira |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidad Católica de Pereira |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista Páginas; Núm. 82 (Dic., 2008); 25-38 0121-1633 |
institution |
Universidad Católica de Pereira |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
|
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1844494667079483392 |