Abstract
Jarvie’s Popper’s social view of science from Logik der Forschung to The Open Society and Its Enemies is used to discuss whether the “proto-constitution” of science that, according to Jarvie, Popper formulated is a sound justification of a falsificationist methodology, and whether the view of society and of social science grounding Popper’s views could be substituted for some more updated insights from contemporary social science. In particular, I defend that a game-theoretic view to the choice of norms, one that takes into account the large variety of real goals and real agents having some role in the scientific process, would be a more appropriate approach to understand the “constitution of science.”
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Buchanan, James, and Gordon Tullock. 1962. The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Caldwell, Bruce. 2006. Popper and Hayek: Who Influenced Whom? In Karl Popper: A Centenary Assessment, ed. Ian Jarvie, Karl Milford, and David Miller, vol. I, 111–124. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Hands, Wade D. 1992. Falsification, Situational Analysis and Scientific Research Programs. In Post-Popperian Methodology of Economics: Recovering Practice, ed. Neil De Marchi, 19–53. Dordrecht, Holland: Kluwer.
Jarvie, Ian C. 2001. The Republic of Science: The Emergence of Popper’s Social View of Science, 1935–1945. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Lipsey, Richard G. 1963. Introduction to Positive Economics. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Merton, Robert K. 1942. Science and Technology in a Democratic Order. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology 1: 115–126.
Morgan, Mary S. 2012. The World in the Model: How Economists Work and Think. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Niiniluto, Ilkka. 1998. Verisimilitude: The Third Period. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1): 1–29.
Popper, Karl R. 2002 [1934]. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge.
———. 1944. The Poverty of Historicism, I, II, III. Economica, 11: 86–103, 119–137; 12: 69–89.
———. 1945. The Open Society and Its Enemies. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
———. 1963. Conjectures and Refutations. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Zamora Bonilla, Jesús P. 2002. Scientific Inference and the Pursuit of Fame: A Contractarian Approach. Philosophy of Science 69: 300–323.
———. 2008. Methodology and the Constitution of Science: A Game-Theoretic Approach. In Scientific Competition, ed. M. Albert et al. Mohr Siebeck: Tübingen.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks Spain’s government research projects PRX14-00007 and FFI2014-57258-P.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zamora Bonilla, J. (2019). The Republic of Science and Its Constitution: Some Reflections on Scientific Methods as Institutions. In: Sassower, R., Laor, N. (eds) The Impact of Critical Rationalism. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90826-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90826-7_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90825-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-90826-7
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)