@wolly.green
@Aaron Thyne
What do you think of Popper's argument against historicism? Do you find it convincing?
@Aaron Thyne
What do you think of Popper's argument against historicism? Do you find it convincing?
There's no point in addressing that kind of scepticism. It borders on what-if-ism... What if the sun exploded? Etc.As usual, there are lot of good points here, but I think you argue past Popper rather than answer his challenge.
@wolly.green
@Aaron Thyne
What do you think of Popper's argument against historicism? Do you find it convincing?
@wolly.green
@Aaron Thyne
What do you think of Popper's argument against historicism? Do you find it convincing?
Absolutely. The idea that you can predict the future history of humanity by looking at historical patterns has always hit a bad nerve with me. It seems so obviously wrong that I didn't need Popper to tell me why. But I do find his reasons why very compelling.
Why do you ask, anyway?
What is the actual point of adopting a future sceptical philosophy, which idealises a reactive stance to events and situations, instead of an active stance, which involves planning and consideration of contingencies?
If we had perfect knowledge of causality and historical reality (from even just a minute in the past), we could have a perfect foresight into the future. THAT sort of foresight would eliminate the NEED for planning, even though one would foresee many instances where causality leads to planning activities, which in turn lead to other events. But our imperfect knowledge of the past and of causality doesn't render forward looking null, it just subjects that forward looking to a degree of uncertainty.
Same. Popper just has a nice way of exhibiting the flaws in historicist reasoning. I have an interest in this topic in relation to the kind of philosophy I'm trying to develop in the side, as well.
The topic of historical prediction just came up a little earlier in the thread, so referencing Popper seemed relevant. And I know you have a good grasp of his arguments. By the way, I read Conjectures and Refutations earlier this year, which was rewarding reading and gave me a good overview of the bulk of his positions in regard to the philosophy of science as well.
It might be cool at some point to create a 'Popper versus Kuhn' thread or something along those lines.
@wolly.green
@Aaron Thyne
What do you think of Popper's argument against historicism? Do you find it convincing?