No description available.

La propuesta de Karl Popper (1902-1994) de presentar sus ideas sobre la música se encuentran fundamentalmente en su autobiografía intelectual Búsqueda sin Término, publicada originalmente en inglés en 1976 bajo el título: Unended Quest. Intellectual Autobiography. La decisión del autor de dar a conocer estas ideas sobre la música e incluirlas en su propia biografía tuvo, como se muestra en el texto referido, tres objetivos esenciales. El primero, ubicar en el plano de la evolución intelectual, la influencia y la importancia de la música en su formación. El segundo, mostrar en qué medida estas especulaciones sobre la música tuvieron una importancia relativa en el desarrollo de su filosofía de madurez, sobre todo en la conceptualización final de la “teoría de los tres mundos”. Y, finalmente, brindar algunas consideraciones básicas sobre el derrotero de la música contemporánea al autor (la música de vanguardia), tomando partido por una opción estética afín a sus teorías filosóficas...

No description available.

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / This work aims to provide an interpretation of Karl Raimund Popper s work concerning two problems and the solutions he proposed to them. Firstly, we will deal with the problems emerging from the debate about which entities can be considered real, namely, whether and how abstract entities interact with the physical world. Popper rejects monist and dualist positions because both of them lead to determinism. So, in order to solve this problem, he proposes a tripartite notion of reality, claiming that reality is the interaction of three worlds: the physical world (World 1), the world of mental states (World 2) and the objective world of abstract entities (World 3). World 3 is inhabited by different types of theories, many of which are very similar to scientific theories, even though they do not belong to the empirical sciences. This account leads to the second problem treated in this work. The problem of demarcation concerns the demarcation of science domains, distinguishing it from the domain of non-scientific theories. Popper solves this problem by giving up the use of induction, because he considers it to be invalid and it would lead science to irrationalism. Instead, he proposes a deductive method of trial and error. Thus, Popper criticizes Verificationism, taken by him as a demarcation criterion which uses inductive logic, and proposes instead Falsificationism. The aim of this work is to unify these two theories demonstrating that one can be interpreted as a consequence of another, seeking to present Popper s account more widely and demonstrating the importance of working them together, in order to comprehend some aspects of the author s theory, such as the notions of truth and knowledge growth. / O presente trabalho tem por objetivo principal apresentar uma interpretação da obra de Karl Raimund Popper que leva em consideração dois problemas e suas respectivas soluções propostas pelo autor. Primeiramente buscar-se-á tratar do problema que emerge do debate sobre que entidades podem ser consideradas reais, a saber, se e como entidades abstratas interagem com o mundo físico. Popper não aceita as posições monistas e dualistas porque ambas levam ao determinismo. Assim, para resolver tal problema, o autor propõe uma noção de realidade tripartite, afirmando que a realidade é composta pela interação de três mundos: o mundo físico (Mundo 1), o mundo dos estados mentais (Mundo 2) e o mundo das entidades abstratas objetivas (Mundo 3). O Mundo 3 é habitado por diferentes tipos de teorias, muitas delas muito semelhantes às teorias científicas, embora não pertençam às ciências empíricas. Isso leva ao segundo problema tratado no presente trabalho. O problema da demarcação consiste em demarcar os domínios da ciência, distinguindo-os dos domínios das demais teorias não científicas. Popper resolve este problema abdicando do uso da indução, dada sua invalidade e por acreditar que ela leva a ciência ao irracionalismo, propondo em contrapartida um método dedutivo de tentativa e erro. Assim Popper critica o Verificacionismo, tido por ele como um critério de demarcação que se utiliza da lógica indutiva, e propõe em seu lugar o Falsificacionismo. Visa-se, portanto, unificar essas teorias demonstrando que uma pode ser interpretada como consequência da outra, buscando assim apresentar o pensamento de Popper de forma mais abrangente e demonstrando a importância de trabalhá-las em conjunto para compreender alguns aspectos da teoria dele como a noção de verdade e do crescimento do conhecimento.

I föreliggande studie undersöks relationen mellan ”förklaringar” och musikalisk interpretation. Mer specifikt frågan varför jag spelar Prokofievs 6:e pianosonat på ett visst sätt. Alla interpreter gör olika val vid förberedelsen och framförandet av ett musikaliskt verk. Många av de valen handlar om tempo, dynamik, frasering men även andra musikaliska parametrar. Denna studie undersöker till vilken grad sådana val går att basera på analytiska ”förklaringar” rörande musikens struktur. Med hjälp av teoretiska perspektiv från Leonard Meyer och Karl Popper undersöker jag ett antal passager som delvis blivit valda för att belysa hur varierat de brukar tolkas. Framförallt försöker studien att undersöka den ”tysta kunskapen” som ligger bakom specifika interpretationer — och i processen göra den kunskapen artikulerad. På grund av detta kan resultatet vara värdefullt både för teoretiker men också för praktiken inom intepretation. Projektet kulminerade i ett liveframförande av sonaten som spelades in. Det framförandet var influerat av min analys av musiken. / The present study investigates the relationship between “explanations” and musical interpretation. More specifically the question why do I play Prokofievs 6th piano sonata in a particular way? Every interpreter makes choices when preparing and performing a musical work. Many such choices involve tempo, dynamics, or phrasing, as well as other musical parameters. This study explores the degree to which these choices may be based on analytic “explanations" of the structure of the music. Building upon the theoretical work of Leonard Meyer and Karl Popper, I identify certain passages which highlight the diversity of interpretation, examining the differences through structural and interpretive analyses. Above all, the study seeks to understand the “tacit knowledge” embodied in certain approaches to musical interpretation — and, in the process, to make it explicit. Therefore, the results are of potential value not only in performance analysis, but in the training of performers. The project culminated in a performance and live recording of the sonata which were influenced by my analysis of the music.

This thesis attempts to understand and conceptualize the contemporary popularity of conspiracy theories. While doing this, conspiracy theories are approached as symptoms of current society. Moreover, the issue of what peculiar characteristics of contemporary society are responsible from conspiracy theories has been discussed. Heretofore, the concept of conspiracy theory is defined and its dangerous traits such as, being anti-scientific knowledge types and their ability to be used by fundamentalist ideologies, have been elaborated. In this regard, the success of conspiracy theories is associated with a crisis of modern ideals of society. In this context, Karl Popper&rsquo / s &ldquo / Open Society&rdquo / ideal and his scientific methodology was updated and stressed upon to widen the discussion on conspiracy theories with the reason that Popperian logic offer crucial solutions about widespread conspiracy theories. Lastly, and in parallel to Popper&rsquo / s deductive logic, the arguments about the reasons of conspiracy theories are tested within the context of two different discussions. First, a discussion on Turkish cultural transformation after 1980s was made in order to understand whether the symptoms which were held responsible from popularity of conspiracy theories are applicable and observable in the Turkish case or not. As a second part, the analysis of a book Efendi, which is a popular conspiracy theory in Turkey will be discussed. In consequence, conspiracy theories and conspirational thinking are presented as important and dangerous symptoms of current society, whose reasons should be understood and conceptualized for the sake of peace and democracy.

<p>Toward the end of the nineteenth century, Ernst Mach expressed his worries about obscurities and metaphysical elements in scientific knowledge, and consequently contributed to the development of a Viennese tradition. Later on, Vienna Circle further extended Mach's ideas and led to the development of the logical positivist movement. Among the main tenets of this movement is the view that scientific theories are to be reduced to an empirical base capable of conclusive verification. But scientific theories are usually based on unverified and occasionally unverifiable hypotheses and principles. Thus, once this is realized, positivism in spite of itself will contribute to the development of scepticism about scientific knowledge.</p> <p>In reaction to the verificationism, however, Karl Popper developed his thesis of falsificationism or fallibilism; but this principle also leads to scepticism at least about certainty claims, with far reaching consequences. This chain of events leads to the development of Paul Feyerabend's epistemological anarchisma a rejection of all rules and methods in science in an attempt to reduce science to the level of irrationality and mythology.</p> <p>Against the negativist conclusions of these positions about science, the integrity of scientific knowledge is defended in this thesis. It is shown how scientific knowledge can be defended against scepticism of the type to which verificationism tends: this is done by examining one recent and rigorous sceptical position which undermines not only certainty and rationality of knowledge claims, but the very possibility of knowledge. By examining Popper's fallibilism, it is shown that science can also be defended against the negativist conclusions of fallibilism. Similarly, it is shown that Feyerabend's epistemological anarchism cannot either undermine scientific knowledge.</p> <p>These negativist positions, though they have received strong criticisms in some quarters, yet have not been examined all together, from the standpoint of their impact on the integrity of scientific knowledge. This task is undertaken in this thesis; we thus arrive at a positive and correct evaluation of scientific knowledge in the context of contemporary negativist epistemological trends. It has been shown that in spite of all the negativist arguments of the above positions, we can obtain certainty, justification, and truth in science, and thus we can obtain knowledge. But my rejection of negativism in science does not entail, and should not be construed as an advocacy of a return to, positivism.</p> / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

<p>This essay describes the philosophy of science that Thomas Kuhn puts forth in his work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The question is, does his description of the scientific paradigm work as well today as in the examples he gave in the book?</p><p>The conclusion is that there are certain factors that make for a number of differences between science today and, for example in the seventeenth century. There is also a growing theory or vision of a post normal science laid developed by among others Jerome Ravetz. This theory or vision is an idea of a science close to peer-communities and fast as well as critical decisions involving opposite values.</p>

This essay describes the philosophy of science that Thomas Kuhn puts forth in his work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The question is, does his description of the scientific paradigm work as well today as in the examples he gave in the book? The conclusion is that there are certain factors that make for a number of differences between science today and, for example in the seventeenth century. There is also a growing theory or vision of a post normal science laid developed by among others Jerome Ravetz. This theory or vision is an idea of a science close to peer-communities and fast as well as critical decisions involving opposite values.

I evaluate the methods of cladistic parsimony and maximum likelihood in phylogenetic systematics by their affinity to Popper‘s degree of corroboration. My work analyzes an important recent exchange between the proponents of the two methods. Until this exchange, only advocates of cladistic parsimony have claimed a basis for their method on epistemological grounds through corroboration. Advocates of maximum likelihood, on the other hand, have based the rational justification for their method largely on statistical grounds. In Part One I outline corroboration in terms of content, severity of test and explanatory power. In Part Two I introduce the two methods. In Part Three I analyze three important debates. The first involves the appropriate probability interpretation for phylogenetics. The second is about severity of test. The third concerns explanatory power. In Part Four I conclude that corroboration can decide none of these debates, and therefore cannot decide the debate between cladistic parsimony and maximum likelihood.