🚀 go-pugleaf

Karl Popper's ethical problems:

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a909857880
Peter Hayes: "Popper obscures but does not altogether hide the
extraordinary implications of his tentative suggestion that Lorentz
and Newton may not have been superseded after all. We see a kind of
internal duel in which Popper the falsificationist scientist wrestles
with Popper the ideological defender of Einstein. The result is a
messy draw in which, through what can only be called a series of
unsatisfactory auxiliary hypotheses, Popper attempts to retain the
idea that Einstein’s relativity theory represents some form of
scientific advance even in if absolute space and time remain intact.
Thus, Einstein’s other achievements are emphasised and the difference
between Einstein and Lorentz is minimised (Popper 1982, 29, 35, 48,
158). Finally, the very concept of scientific advance is adapted to
fit the new circumstances:
Karl Popper: "The decisive thing about Einstein’s theory, from my
point of view, is that it has shown that Newton’s theory - which has
been more successful than any other theory ever proposed - can be
replaced by an alternative theory which is of wider scope, and which
is so related to Newton’s theory that every success of Newtonian
theory is also a success for that theory, and which in fact makes
slight adjustments to some results of Newtonian theory. So for me,
this logical situation is more important than the question which of
the two theories is in fact the better approximation to the
truth" (Popper 1982, 29–30)."

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com