I think I’ve said that . . . many times, but lately in #512, this thread.
“Echoing the scientific philosopher Karl Popper, Stephen Hawking . . . ”
Really?! You’ve previously informed us (in #512 and #520) that you had never heard of Karl Popper. (“Karl Popper is almost unknown among scientists. I do not recall ever hearing his name before”)
Apparently this thread has made you acquainted with the mysterious and obscure Karl Popper. Further, it would appear that even so eminent and acclaimed a modern scientist as Stephen Hawking knows of the nebulous Mr. Popper (as do most all scientists, if the truth be acknowledged).
Now you’re having a continuing discussion on Mr. Popper with a few other correspondents, so I will leave you to your discussions, following its progress with interest.
In the meantime, the observations you attribute to Mr. Hawking represent a brief summation of two thousand years’ thinking of Western Civilization Philosophy on the subject of the ‘Scientific Method’ upon which hangs the entire future of your chosen career.
I think I’ve said that . . . many times, but lately in #512, this thread.
“Echoing the scientific philosopher Karl Popper, Stephen Hawking . . . ”
Really?! You’ve previously informed us (in #512 and #520) that you had never heard of Karl Popper. (“Karl Popper is almost unknown among scientists. I do not recall ever hearing his name before”)
Thanks to the Internet, I can quickly look up Popper (and just about anyone else). My assessment is that he was attempting to describe the scientific method from an outsider's point of view; his view of it was rather simplistic and inaccurate. I have also learned that he, like many others, is often quoted out of context by advocates of "creation science".
Apparently this thread has made you acquainted with the mysterious and obscure Karl Popper. Further, it would appear that even so eminent and acclaimed a modern scientist as Stephen Hawking knows of the nebulous Mr. Popper (as do most all scientists, if the truth be acknowledged).
Actually, that quote did not indicate whether Dr. Hawking is aware of Popper. The author of that Wikipedia article was comparing a statement of Dr. Hawking's to a statement made by Popper. I would not make any assumptions about whom other scientists may have heard of; by the paucity of mentions of Popper in the scientific literature, the failure of any of my colleagues to ever mention him, and the utter lack of mention in any science course, seminar, meeting, etc., I have ever attended, I would guess that he is as unknown to most scientists as he was to me just a few days ago.
Now you’re having a continuing discussion on Mr. Popper with a few other correspondents, so I will leave you to your discussions, following its progress with interest.
In the meantime, the observations you attribute to Mr. Hawking represent a brief summation of two thousand years’ thinking of Western Civilization Philosophy on the subject of the ‘Scientific Method’ upon which hangs the entire future of your chosen career.
The scientific method was not developed by philosophers, but by scientists. Science and philosophy are, as far as I can tell, diametric opposites. Throughout undergraduate and graduate school, the subject of philosophy never came up.