Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science ((BSPS,volume 3))

Abstract

To what extent and in what respect is science intellectually valuable? This is a controversial matter. What is hardly disputed is that what is alterable in science is of mere ephemeral value; and what is valuable in it is that which is more universal and permanent, that which is more solid and lasting. One of the very few philosophers who oppose this accepted view is Sir Karl Popper. In his view, science is so valuable because of its open-mindedness, because any of its achievements may at any time be given up and newer achievements may be hoped for to replace the relinquished ones. Science, says Popper, is at constant war with itself, and it progresses by revolutions and internal conflicts.

I am indebted to my wife Judith, to William W. Bartley, III, and to Robert S. Cohen, for their patient reading of many drafts, and making many corrections and suggestions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. See my Towards an Historiography of Science, The Hague 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  2. See my ‘The Nature of Scientific Problems and their Roots in Metaphysics’, in The Critical Approach: Essays in Honor of Karl Popper (ed. M. Bunge), New York 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  3. K. R. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, New York 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  4. I owe this to a private conversation with Burtt.

    Google Scholar 

  5. K. R. Popper, Conjectures and Refutations, Chapter 10, ‘Truth, Rationality, and the Growth of Scientific Knowledge’, § 5.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Alonzo Church, ‘Mathematics and Logic’, in Logic’, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science (Proceedings of the 1960 International Congress) (ed. E. Nagel, P. Suppes, and A. Tarski ), Stanford, Calif., 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  7. See Rudolf Carnap’s ‘Reply to Critics’, in The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap (ed. P. A. Schilpp), Evanston 1964.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Robert S. Cohen Marx W. Wartofsky

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1967 D. Reidel Publishing Company / Dordrecht-Holland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Agassi, J. (1967). Science in Flux. In: Cohen, R.S., Wartofsky, M.W. (eds) Proceedings of the Boston Colloquium for the Philosophy of Science 1964/1966. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3508-8_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3508-8_16

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-3510-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-3508-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics