4 IMRE LAKATOS falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programs |. SCIENCE: REASON OR oe ao probate foe Kun tin Ces of the dominant tery and or Poppe ect changes aon raonaly reconcile and fssto nench proba. Mars an sn i the “ale may be aloes wo be fof eternal es. Hi main ‘wae secon 15 the pot bein, For demand the wtheoey and ico ty Afcasioniam in the realm of LAKATOS/Faicaton ad the Method the ln of aco, For Kuhn seni change— from one “parscgn’ to another a myst eon version ich if not and cannot be governed ful of rsson ad which fl oul win the change ia kindof religious change The ish beeen: Popper and Kuba i noe bout mere tecnica pola in epistemology. I oncerns our cena nerves nd ba me pcaons ot onl For thors payee But ao tmorl and pole phiovopty. If even in scence there fro ther way of hing a theory tu a ‘esting the number, fh and vocal energy of Sect sciences tt sin power Th Kuhn's po aon would vndeate, no. dou, uninenonaly the basi poieal eed of contemporary rcigous ‘antes (Student eoluonaie). In this paper I shll st show dat Popper's lope of scenic dncorery to ifn postions ‘ave fications” (L prefer the term “naive smchodologiatfesifetonism’y tisk that hit SE But Kuhn doer noe understand a mor sophia ‘ated pion the radon of which sot based on ale Faber. t sally to explin—and Which, din, may ecape Kohn stu and preset siete rotons ax consitating ran 2 FALLIBILISM VERSUS FALSIFICATIONISM Sophisticated versus naive ‘methodological asiieationism. Progressive and degenerating problemshifs Sophisticated fificonim lifes fram nave fi sifcauoniam both mite ules of alana nde ‘mareabon criteroe’) and rues of falcon oe ‘limiaation. Forth ave fateeatonis ny theory which canbe interpreted as experimentally fli ‘tit eads tothe discovery of novel facts Tis eon. theories is also npr pape or tina piri presi pont some ft ex ss empitical content ao oerborted, ht ‘Sch new theory ds ut he acta dconey of ome nw fet Fils tu la probs p= ‘esie both heretaly an pial pro reste, and dienratin pot” We ane problems a scenic’ aly if they area lat Uhsoetelly progressive f Wey ae no, we‘hh sic toons optional but nx manatees For the so. effec Ths it Kul’ i ain the unncy replacing 2 aif rypothess ty af hsitionsm. For may seston coat ites THE POPPERIAN VERSUS fenitr—ex fusca tou hate abo. estes THE KUHNIAN RESEARCH, on of ado standard wae a opel enprise interested PROGRAM an that alone an do 9 edad ato bac rity of seentic growth, the twat of some learned of the collapse of jusifestivnist rational donot w the entire Popperian research program, and env iit wh the nd of analy fave to be in tx the roof scene induct and ana Crea nop wast Be ele by according Heme, inductive and rational sor laa called a "pore? plisopy Bat alee in to Popper But Wakins’s comparann can be ee we ave sd ot the mi of Ue aeNotts posto, ef Musgrave [9694], Mis iran ran) 10, apne 1945}, oT Seats dhewri pon Iain. (CL my 1968eh pp 38-8) a Haake sp antes are REFERENCES Feyerabend (190) Ags Method Mic Sd Kahn (1965: ‘Logie of Discovery or Poychtogy Lats [18680] “Changsia he Probl of insti {Latter (19684 Cota Mathasogy alate {1970 Pe Changing Lago Seeboa 1 LARRY LAUDAN Science at the Bar-Causes for Concern rater of fat Th 8c ay witout engi