At College studying Architecture the History of Scientific Revolution was on the reading list. It was considered part of the opening up of the mind that was the philosophy of the course. I recall somehow Popper had offended the Marxists with his attacks on Historicism and Pseudoscience labelling and Kuhn was seen by such people like showing a cross to the Dracula of the Popper side. I do not recall any in depth discussion of this and it remained in the background. I read the book and feeling at that time I felt the need to find empathy with such new ideas I thought it was a good insight not into how science should be but rather how it tended to be. Others took the view that I disagreed with which was that Kuhn was saying science was just as much a belief as ideologies and religion and as far as I can tell this did Kuhn;s reputation a lot of damage. Later I read Popper and became quite a fan. His ideas on falsification are important though I can see how much of scientific investigation is too broad in scope to fit this - more of a general gathering of information. I still read the likes of Marx and Freud but always with Popper’s warnings in mind. When I think of a proper test (or Popper test), I think of Einstein’s solar eclipse predictions and the two slit photon diffraction experiments related to quantum theory. It is odd that Kuhn did not use this as examples of the crumpling of an old order. I am perhaps a hopeless skeptic but I keep my thoughts fairly private. I still look with interest for the moment of a new scientific revolution which despite appearing on opposite sides would probably require a Popperian event.
Great interview. But seems like after 2022 things changed a bit politically. We have putin who is openly threat to civilisation and we have a chance to elect his friend Trump(the great dictators lover) as the president of US. I don’t know about living in dangerous times but I think we are very close to those times and the trust in good institutions is all we have…
50:17 Democracy has failed now completely. We need a benevolent dictatorship world wide. I prefer Putin or the Chinese government anytime over what we have today in the USA, England, European Union countries. I grew up in Germany with blind faith into socialism and white guilt. It took me 50 years to understand that this socialist woke structure is causing worse catastrophes than any single dictator could ever create.
Bartley accused Popper of fideism because ‘he demands a decision where no justification can be provided” This criticism of Bartley’s makes no sense - why would you need a justification? Didn’t Bartley argue against this throughout the book retreat to commitment?
I have two questions for you, I would be happy if you answer them. 1- Can you explain bartley's god reasoning. 2-Can you explain how Bartley's proof of god turns the hypothetical subject into something substantial? Thank you.
4:04 33:32 Purpose, I think, is the thing that qualifies a solution. The accomplishment interlocutor has in mind is subjective. The purpose of a solution is a reflection of the interlocutor's world view and even their self image.
Damn. This is exactly what I want and THIS DUDE was a former professor of mine that I highly respected. Story Time: I submitted an essay that received 50%, i was like WTF. Requested an interview with Shearmer. He said 'pretty much it's what it deserves'. I was like 'something doesn't make sense'. He said 'next time, get a trusted friend preferably a few years above you to review the work before submission'. I said, 'yeah, i sort of did do that' He said 'really...' looks over the essay again 'this first sentence, this sentence, it's really bad'. I said 'that single sentence I inserted AFTER the guy reviewed the essay'. Shearmer says 'ok, give me a second, I'm going to take another look and ignore the first sentence'. Proceeds to tell me it's worth at least a high distinction, but that my original grade stands given the state of submission. I respected him for taking the time (out of hundreds of students) listening to what I said, re-evaluating his position, and telling me the truth.
Very interesting chat. I hadn't drawn some of these lines, but now it all makes a lot of sense. Especially when looking at the 'follow the science' narrative around the pandemic response. It was the Kuhnian sort of science they were asking us to follow, and as more of a Popperian, I found the whole thing rather frustrating. Same can be said for 'climate science'.
U.S. didn't order 5.18 massacres in Kwangju (that lasted until 5.27 and beyond), but in 1987 they stopped Chun from violently suppressing protests in 1986/1987 with a simple threat? U.S. moved warship and other military assets into the arena to support the massacres [Korea military did not have any of the helicopters used when soldiers shot from the skies onto protesting crowds, for instance], but they had no control over how, when, where, and by whom those military assets were used? I respect Shorrock for exposing more of what actually happened in Gwangju, but he's still a shill for the U.S., trying to make it look like the U.S. didn't order the massacres and weren't part of it. Bullshit. U.S. hand-picked Chun to move up from mid-general ranks to take over the country when Park was found to be running intelligence ops on U.S. legislators. U.S. had Park killed and had Chun lined up to replace him, along with his friends from the same 'class' at the military academy. Shorrock is a wet noodle here -- so unconvincing and wrong.
Please be very careful and check his academic background. This man is a fraud. I replaced him at his university. Thomas, please stop pretending to be a historian and English teacher.
I'll be 75 soon and this issue comes to mind often. The pandemic, the new climate change, and especially the war on science, especially climate science, brought me to believe in the extinction of humanity sooner than later. Depression arrives in bundles and subsides slowly, and then bingo, I read books like "They Knew: The US Federal Government's Fifty-Year Role in Causing the Climate Crisis." It's been five years or so since "Exxon, The Road Not Taken," and my belief in the utter futility of world wars and the rest to defend democracy comes to mind in these days of mass idiocy - - we reshaped the planet and all for nothing. Nuclear warheads, climbing CO2 and methane atmospheric density and the rest justifies this sense of doom. I ask, how can so many not share this sense of impending doom? I read On Consolation in a month or so as a reward for reaching 75.
I recently found this channel and thank my good fortune for it. I do not sleep well at night, and having something worthwhile for those waking moments became very important the last decade. I see that I found a trove of great listening hours ahead. I expect to place these ahead of my other preferred videos and audio productions. Thanks for making this available. I'm really enyoy Popper information.
Thank you Jed for this discussion with David! Besides the serious discussion, you are both super entertaining! 1:27:00 ..."I think you have to condemn the people!" Jed! Freaking hilarious! 🤣 And David almost made me fall off my chair too with 14:00 "Sounds like the most God awful thing I’ve ever lent my ears to!!"😂 I hope that you will have David back again for a future podcast! 🙏
Again someone who naively interprets Popper. I love your podcast but after Maarten Boudry this is already the second guest who talks as if he never read Popper seriously. Those people better seek other places to spread their pseudo-interpretations.
