Divyanshu67/squad_v2 huggingface dataset:
Karl_Popper

To Popper, who was an anti-justificationist, traditional philosophy is misled by the false principle of sufficient reason. He thinks that no assumption can ever be or needs ever to be justified, so a lack of justification is not a justification for doubt. Instead, theories should be tested and scrutinised. It is not the goal to bless theories with claims of certainty or justification, but to eliminate errors in them. He writes, "there are no such things as good positive reasons; nor do we need such things [...] But [philosophers] obviously cannot quite bring [themselves] to believe that this is my opinion, let alone that it is right" (The Philosophy of Karl Popper, p. 1043)

Question: According to Popper, what is not grounds for doubt?
Answer: lack of justification

Question: What principle of traditional philosophy did Popper take an anti-justificationist stance against?
Answer: principle of sufficient reason

Question: What does Popper believe is essential to do to theories instead of justification?
Answer: eliminate errors

Question: What don't we need to look for about theories in Popper's view?
Answer: good positive reasons

Question: Who was a pro-justificationist?

Question: What did Popper think needed to be justified?

Question: What is a justification for doubt?

Question: Who believed that good positive reasons exist?

Question: What did Popper think should never be tested or scrutinized?
Karl_Popper

In The Open Society and Its Enemies and The Poverty of Historicism, Popper developed a critique of historicism and a defence of the "Open Society". Popper considered historicism to be the theory that history develops inexorably and necessarily according to knowable general laws towards a determinate end. He argued that this view is the principal theoretical presupposition underpinning most forms of authoritarianism and totalitarianism. He argued that historicism is founded upon mistaken assumptions regarding the nature of scientific law and prediction. Since the growth of human knowledge is a causal factor in the evolution of human history, and since "no society can predict, scientifically, its own future states of knowledge", it follows, he argued, that there can be no predictive science of human history. For Popper, metaphysical and historical indeterminism go hand in hand.

Question: Which of Popper's works criticized the idea that history has an inexorable developmental path?
Answer: The Poverty of Historicism

Question: What is the term for the view that there are discoverable general laws constraining history's development?
Answer: historicism

Question: What political forms did Popper believe historicism supported?
Answer: authoritarianism and totalitarianism

Question: What unpredictable feature of the world did Popper say refuted historicism?
Answer: the growth of human knowledge

Question: In what book did Popper defend historicism?

Question: Who criticized the "Open Society"?

Question: What did Einstein consider historicism to be?

Question: What did Popper argue is founded on correct assumptions regarding the nature of scientific law and prediction?

Question: What can predict its own future states of knowledge?
Karl_Popper

As early as 1934, Popper wrote of the search for truth as "one of the strongest motives for scientific discovery." Still, he describes in Objective Knowledge (1972) early concerns about the much-criticised notion of truth as correspondence. Then came the semantic theory of truth formulated by the logician Alfred Tarski and published in 1933. Popper writes of learning in 1935 of the consequences of Tarski's theory, to his intense joy. The theory met critical objections to truth as correspondence and thereby rehabilitated it. The theory also seemed, in Popper's eyes, to support metaphysical realism and the regulative idea of a search for truth.

Question: Whose theory of truth did Popper read with intense interest in 1935?
Answer: Alfred Tarski

Question: What theory of interest to Popper did Alfred Tarski publish in 1933?
Answer: semantic theory of truth

Question: Tarski's theory overcame certain objections to what conception of truth?
Answer: truth as correspondence

Question: What kind of realism did Popper believe Tarski's theory supported?
Answer: metaphysical

Question: What did Popper write about before 1934?

Question: Whose theory of truth did Alfred Tarski read in 1935?

Question: What seemed to disprove metaphysical realism and the regulative idea of a search for truth to Popper?

Question: What did Tarski write about the search for truth in 1934?

Question: What book by Alfred Tarski was published in 1972?
Karl_Popper

According to this theory, the conditions for the truth of a sentence as well as the sentences themselves are part of a metalanguage. So, for example, the sentence "Snow is white" is true if and only if snow is white. Although many philosophers have interpreted, and continue to interpret, Tarski's theory as a deflationary theory, Popper refers to it as a theory in which "is true" is replaced with "corresponds to the facts". He bases this interpretation on the fact that examples such as the one described above refer to two things: assertions and the facts to which they refer. He identifies Tarski's formulation of the truth conditions of sentences as the introduction of a "metalinguistic predicate" and distinguishes the following cases:

Question: What term do philosophers give to the kind of theory Tarski proposed about truth?
Answer: deflationary

Question: With what does Popper say Tarski's theory replaces the predicate "is true?"
Answer: "corresponds to the facts"

Question: What concept did Tarski introduce to discuss the conditions for the truth of statements?
Answer: metalanguage

Question: What two things does Popper argue Tarski's theory involves in an evaluation of truth?
Answer: assertions and the facts to which they refer

Question: What is not part of a metalanguage?

Question: When is the sentence "Snow is white" untrue?

Question: What does Popper interpret as a deflationary theory?

Question: What does Tarski base his interpretation of Popper on?

Question: What does Tarski identify Popper's formulation of the truth conditions of sentences as?
Karl_Popper

Upon this basis, along with that of the logical content of assertions (where logical content is inversely proportional to probability), Popper went on to develop his important notion of verisimilitude or "truthlikeness". The intuitive idea behind verisimilitude is that the assertions or hypotheses of scientific theories can be objectively measured with respect to the amount of truth and falsity that they imply. And, in this way, one theory can be evaluated as more or less true than another on a quantitative basis which, Popper emphasises forcefully, has nothing to do with "subjective probabilities" or other merely "epistemic" considerations.

Question: What term does Popper use that roughly means verisimilitude?
Answer: truthlikeness

Question: Poppers notion of verisimilitude leaves no place for which kind of probabilities in the evaluation of scientific hypotheses?
Answer: subjective

Question: What class of considerations did Popper believe were not important in scientific measurement?
Answer: epistemic

Question: What is the logical content of hypotheses inversely proportional to in Popper's reasoning?
Answer: probability

Question: What term means the opposite of verisimilitude?

Question: What was Popper's unimportant notion?

Question: What can never be evaluated as more or less true than another on an quantitative basis?

Question: What does Popper emphasize has a lot to do with subjective probabilities?
Karl_Popper

Knowledge, for Popper, was objective, both in the sense that it is objectively true (or truthlike), and also in the sense that knowledge has an ontological status (i.e., knowledge as object) independent of the knowing subject (Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach, 1972). He proposed three worlds: World One, being the physical world, or physical states; World Two, being the world of mind, or mental states, ideas, and perceptions; and World Three, being the body of human knowledge expressed in its manifold forms, or the products of the second world made manifest in the materials of the first world (i.e., books, papers, paintings, symphonies, and all the products of the human mind). World Three, he argued, was the product of individual human beings in exactly the same sense that an animal path is the product of individual animals, and that, as such, has an existence and evolution independent of any individual knowing subjects. The influence of World Three, in his view, on the individual human mind (World Two) is at least as strong as the influence of World One. In other words, the knowledge held by a given individual mind owes at least as much to the total accumulated wealth of human knowledge, made manifest, as to the world of direct experience. As such, the growth of human knowledge could be said to be a function of the independent evolution of World Three. Many contemporary philosophers, such as Daniel Dennett, have not embraced Popper's Three World conjecture, due mostly, it seems, to its resemblance to mind-body dualism.

Question: What did Popper argue was objective and independent of its subject?
Answer: knowledge

Question: How many different worlds or realities did Popper differentiate in Objective Knowledge?
Answer: three

Question: What constituted World One in Popper's theory?
Answer: the physical world

Question: Who produced the contents of World Three?
Answer: individual human beings

Question: Which world's evolution corresponds to the growth of human knowledge?
Answer: World Three

Question: What was not objective for Popper?

Question: In what book did Popper say that knowledge was dependent on the knowing subject?

Question: How many different worlds or realities did Einstein define in Objective Knowledge?

Question: What constituted World Four in Popper's theory?

Question: What items did Popper say were not a product of the second world made manifest in the first world?
Karl_Popper

The creation–evolution controversy in the United States raises the issue of whether creationistic ideas may be legitimately called science and whether evolution itself may be legitimately called science. In the debate, both sides and even courts in their decisions have frequently invoked Popper's criterion of falsifiability (see Daubert standard). In this context, passages written by Popper are frequently quoted in which he speaks about such issues himself. For example, he famously stated "Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research program—a possible framework for testable scientific theories." He continued:

Question: Which of Popper's notions is often invoked in creation-evolution debates?
Answer: criterion of falsifiability

Question: What kind of research program did Popper call Darwinism?
Answer: metaphysical

Question: What phrase did Popper use to describe Darwinism's relation to proper falsifiable theories?
Answer: possible framework

Question: Popper's philosophy is often applied in what political debate concerning biological science?
Answer: creation–evolution

Question: What issues does the creation-evolution controversy in Canada raise?

Question: What have both sides of the debate never invoked?

Question: Where is there no creation-evolution controversy?

Question: How often are passages by Darwin quoted in the creation–evolution controversy?

Question: Who stated that Darwinism is a testable scientific theory?
Karl_Popper

Popper had his own sophisticated views on evolution that go much beyond what the frequently-quoted passages say. In effect, Popper agreed with some of the points of both creationists and naturalists, but also disagreed with both views on crucial aspects. Popper understood the universe as a creative entity that invents new things, including life, but without the necessity of something like a god, especially not one who is pulling strings from behind the curtain. He said that evolution must, as the creationists say, work in a goal-directed way but disagreed with their view that it must necessarily be the hand of god that imposes these goals onto the stage of life.

Question: Along with some creationists, Popper believed that evolution must have what quality to its progress?
Answer: goal-directed

Question: Popper disagreed with creationists that whose hand must be directing evolution?
Answer: god

Question: What kind of an entity did Popper believe the universe to be?
Answer: creative

Question: What did Popper not have sophisticated views on?

Question: What did Darwin understand the universe as?

Question: Who thought that the universe necessitated a god?

Question: What didn't go beyond what the frequently-quoted passages said?

Question: Who thought that evolution did not work in a goal-directed way?
Karl_Popper

Instead, he formulated the spearhead model of evolution, a version of genetic pluralism. According to this model, living organisms themselves have goals, and act according to these goals, each guided by a central control. In its most sophisticated form, this is the brain of humans, but controls also exist in much less sophisticated ways for species of lower complexity, such as the amoeba. This control organ plays a special role in evolution—it is the "spearhead of evolution". The goals bring the purpose into the world. Mutations in the genes that determine the structure of the control may then cause drastic changes in behaviour, preferences and goals, without having an impact on the organism's phenotype. Popper postulates that such purely behavioural changes are less likely to be lethal for the organism compared to drastic changes of the phenotype.

Question: What is the name of Popper's model of evolution?
Answer: spearhead

Question: Popper's model of evolution is part of what family of models?
Answer: genetic pluralism

Question: What directs the actions of organisms in Popper's biological model?
Answer: goals

Question: Organisms' goals shift along with which notable genetic process?
Answer: Mutations

Question: In which model do living organisms not have goals?

Question: What is the least sophisticated form of organisms with central control?

Question: What is a species of higher complexity than the human brain?

Question: What are mutations in the genes not able to change?

Question: What does Popper think is more likely to be lethal to an organism than changes of phenotype?
Karl_Popper

Popper contrasts his views with the notion of the "hopeful monster" that has large phenotype mutations and calls it the "hopeful behavioural monster". After behaviour has changed radically, small but quick changes of the phenotype follow to make the organism fitter to its changed goals. This way it looks as if the phenotype were changing guided by some invisible hand, while it is merely natural selection working in combination with the new behaviour. For example, according to this hypothesis, the eating habits of the giraffe must have changed before its elongated neck evolved. Popper contrasted this view as "evolution from within" or "active Darwinism" (the organism actively trying to discover new ways of life and being on a quest for conquering new ecological niches), with the naturalistic "evolution from without" (which has the picture of a hostile environment only trying to kill the mostly passive organism, or perhaps segregate some of its groups).

Question: Which view of evolution emphasizing large changes in organisms' phenotypes does Popper oppose to his own?
Answer: hopeful monster

Question: Which aspect of organisms changes most radically in the process of evolution Popper envisions?
Answer: behaviour

Question: How does Popper describe the "monsters" that evolve in his view of evolutionary processes?
Answer: hopeful behavioural monster

Question: What kind of Darwinism does Popper subscribe to in contrast to the naturalistic kind?
Answer: active

Question: What happens after behavior changes only a little?

Question: What do large and slow changes to the phenotype do?

Question: What changed after the giraffe evolved a long neck?

Question: What did Darwin contrast "active Darwinism" with?
Karl_Popper

About the creation-evolution controversy, Popper wrote that he considered it "a somewhat sensational clash between a brilliant scientific hypothesis concerning the history of the various species of animals and plants on earth, and an older metaphysical theory which, incidentally, happened to be part of an established religious belief" with a footnote to the effect that "[he] agree[s] with Professor C.E. Raven when, in his Science, Religion, and the Future, 1943, he calls this conflict "a storm in a Victorian tea-cup"; though the force of this remark is perhaps a little impaired by the attention he pays to the vapours still emerging from the cup—to the Great Systems of Evolutionist Philosophy, produced by Bergson, Whitehead, Smuts, and others."

Question: Which professor cited by Popper described the creation-evolution debate as "a storm in a Victorian tea-cup?"
Answer: C.E. Raven

Question: What controversy involving science did Popper believe was sensationalized because of its connection with religion?
Answer: creation-evolution

Question: In which year did C.E. Raven publish the remarks on creation-evolution quoted by Popper?
Answer: 1943

Question: What term does Popper use when describing creationism as a type of theory?
Answer: metaphysical

Question: Who wrote that the creation-evolution controversy was "not sensational" ?

Question: Who did Professor Raven say he agreed with?

Question: In what book did Popper called the conflict "a storm in a Victorian tea-cup"?

Question: In what year did Popper publish Science, Religion, and the Future?

Question: Who thought the force of Popper's remarks was impaired to the attention he paid to the conflict?
Karl_Popper

In an interview that Popper gave in 1969 with the condition that it shall be kept secret until after his death, he summarised his position on God as follows: "I don't know whether God exists or not. ... Some forms of atheism are arrogant and ignorant and should be rejected, but agnosticism—to admit that we don't know and to search—is all right. ... When I look at what I call the gift of life, I feel a gratitude which is in tune with some religious ideas of God. However, the moment I even speak of it, I am embarrassed that I may do something wrong to God in talking about God." He objected to organised religion, saying "it tends to use the name of God in vain", noting the danger of fanaticism because of religious conflicts: "The whole thing goes back to myths which, though they may have a kernel of truth, are untrue. Why then should the Jewish myth be true and the Indian and Egyptian myths not be true?" In a letter unrelated to the interview, he stressed his tolerant attitude: "Although I am not for religion, I do think that we should show respect for anybody who believes honestly."

Question: In which year did Popper give a secret interview concerning his views about God?
Answer: 1969

Question: Which term for his religious outlook did Popper prefer?
Answer: agnosticism

Question: What did Popper believe were at the heart of religious disagreements, and should not be the cause of as much conflict as they are?
Answer: myths

Question: Although he opposed organized religion, what attitude did Popper think should be taken toward it:
Answer: tolerant

Question: When did Popper give an interview on the condition it be published right away?

Question: Who thought that atheism was superior to agnosticism?

Question: What kind of religion did Popper support?

Question: Why did Popper support organized religion?

Question: Who did Popper believe should not be respected?
Karl_Popper

Popper played a vital role in establishing the philosophy of science as a vigorous, autonomous discipline within philosophy, through his own prolific and influential works, and also through his influence on his own contemporaries and students. Popper founded in 1946 the Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method at the London School of Economics and there lectured and influenced both Imre Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend, two of the foremost philosophers of science in the next generation of philosophy of science. (Lakatos significantly modified Popper's position,:1 and Feyerabend repudiated it entirely, but the work of both is deeply influenced by Popper and engaged with many of the problems that Popper set.)

Question: What branch of philosophy did Popper advance the most?
Answer: philosophy of science

Question: Which department did Popper found at the London School of Economics?
Answer: Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method

Question: Which two major philosophers of science learned a great deal from Popper at the London School Economics?
Answer: Imre Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend

Question: What did Paul Feyerabend ultimate do to Popper's philosophy of science?
Answer: repudiated it entirely

Question: Where did Popper establish a university department for the philosophy of science in 1946?
Answer: London School of Economics

Question: Who did not play a role in the philosophy of science?

Question: When was the Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method at the London School of Economics disbanded?

Question: What department did Einstein found in 1946 in London?

Question: Who did Imre Lakatos lecture to?

Question: Which philosopher completely agreed with Popper's unmodified position?
Karl_Popper

While there is some dispute as to the matter of influence, Popper had a long-standing and close friendship with economist Friedrich Hayek, who was also brought to the London School of Economics from Vienna. Each found support and similarities in the other's work, citing each other often, though not without qualification. In a letter to Hayek in 1944, Popper stated, "I think I have learnt more from you than from any other living thinker, except perhaps Alfred Tarski." Popper dedicated his Conjectures and Refutations to Hayek. For his part, Hayek dedicated a collection of papers, Studies in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics, to Popper, and in 1982 said, "...ever since his Logik der Forschung first came out in 1934, I have been a complete adherent to his general theory of methodology."

Question: Which other Austrian scholar and friend of Popper also worked near him at the London School of Economics?
Answer: Friedrich Hayek

Question: What was Hayek's academic field?
Answer: Economics

Question: In which year did Popper write Hayek a letter expressing his intellectual debt to him?
Answer: 1944

Question: Who did Popper say was the only thinker who might have had a greater influence on him than Hayek?
Answer: Alfred Tarski

Question: Which of Hayek's publications was dedicated to Popper?
Answer: Studies in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

Question: Who has a long rivalry with Popper?

Question: Who never communicated with Hayek?

Question: Who did Hayek write a letter to in 1944?

Question: Who did Alfred Tarski say he had learned more from than any other living thinker?

Question: When did Studies in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics come out?
Karl_Popper

He does not argue that any such conclusions are therefore true, or that this describes the actual methods of any particular scientist.[citation needed] Rather, it is recommended as an essential principle of methodology that, if enacted by a system or community, will lead to slow but steady progress of a sort (relative to how well the system or community enacts the method). It has been suggested that Popper's ideas are often mistaken for a hard logical account of truth because of the historical co-incidence of their appearing at the same time as logical positivism, the followers of which mistook his aims for their own.

Question: What other contemporaneous school of thought is often confused with Popper's own contributions?
Answer: logical positivism

Question: Popper has stressed that his description of scientific methodology should not be mistaken to apply to whom?
Answer: any particular scientist

Question: At what level does Popper indicate his view of scientific methodology applies?
Answer: system or community

Question: What kind of progress does science make given the methodology Popper describes?
Answer: slow but steady

Question: What does Popper argue is therefore true?

Question: Whose ideas are a logical account of truth?

Question: What did not appear at the same time as Popper's ideas?

Question: What did the followers of logical positivism mistake as opposite to their own?

Question: What kind of progress does science make if it does not use Popper's methodology?
Karl_Popper

The Quine-Duhem thesis argues that it's impossible to test a single hypothesis on its own, since each one comes as part of an environment of theories. Thus we can only say that the whole package of relevant theories has been collectively falsified, but cannot conclusively say which element of the package must be replaced. An example of this is given by the discovery of the planet Neptune: when the motion of Uranus was found not to match the predictions of Newton's laws, the theory "There are seven planets in the solar system" was rejected, and not Newton's laws themselves. Popper discussed this critique of naïve falsificationism in Chapters 3 and 4 of The Logic of Scientific Discovery. For Popper, theories are accepted or rejected via a sort of selection process. Theories that say more about the way things appear are to be preferred over those that do not; the more generally applicable a theory is, the greater its value. Thus Newton's laws, with their wide general application, are to be preferred over the much more specific "the solar system has seven planets".[dubious – discuss]

Question: What thesis says a scientific hypothesis is not testable in isolation from its system of theories?
Answer: Quine-Duhem

Question: Which of Popper's works responds to critiques of naive falsificationism?
Answer: The Logic of Scientific Discovery

Question: The planet Uranus' apparent failure to follow Newton's laws led to the discovery of which planet?
Answer: Neptune

Question: According to Popper, the scientific selection process favors which type of theory?
Answer: more generally applicable

Question: What thesis says it is possible to test a single hypothesis alone?

Question: What can we conclusively say must be replaced?

Question: When was the theory that there are eight planets in the solar system rejected?

Question: What did Popper discuss in chapters 5 and 6 of The Logic of Scientific Discovery?

Question: Why are Newton's laws not preferred over the other theory?
Karl_Popper

Popper claimed to have recognised already in the 1934 version of his Logic of Discovery a fact later stressed by Kuhn, "that scientists necessarily develop their ideas within a definite theoretical framework", and to that extent to have anticipated Kuhn's central point about "normal science". (But Popper criticised what he saw as Kuhn's relativism.) Also, in his collection Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge (Harper & Row, 1963), Popper writes, "Science must begin with myths, and with the criticism of myths; neither with the collection of observations, nor with the invention of experiments, but with the critical discussion of myths, and of magical techniques and practices. The scientific tradition is distinguished from the pre-scientific tradition in having two layers. Like the latter, it passes on its theories; but it also passes on a critical attitude towards them. The theories are passed on, not as dogmas, but rather with the challenge to discuss them and improve upon them."

Question: Popper believed he had already discussed similar ideas to Kuhn's about scientific communities in what work?
Answer: Logic of Discovery

Question: What aspect of Kuhn's thinking did Popper criticize?
Answer: relativism

Question: What did Popper say must be the beginning phase of science?
Answer: the critical discussion of myths

Question: According to Popper, what second layer does scientific inquiry have that pre-scientific inquiry does not?
Answer: a critical attitude

Question: What year did Kuhn stress "that scientists necessarily develop their ideas within a definite theoretical framework"?

Question: What book did Kuhn publish in 1934?

Question: What did Kuhn criticize about Popper?

Question: What did Kuhn say must be the beginning phase of science?

Question: According to Kuhn, what second layer does scientific inquiry have that pre-scientific inquiry does not?
Karl_Popper

Another objection is that it is not always possible to demonstrate falsehood definitively, especially if one is using statistical criteria to evaluate a null hypothesis. More generally it is not always clear, if evidence contradicts a hypothesis, that this is a sign of flaws in the hypothesis rather than of flaws in the evidence. However, this is a misunderstanding of what Popper's philosophy of science sets out to do. Rather than offering a set of instructions that merely need to be followed diligently to achieve science, Popper makes it clear in The Logic of Scientific Discovery that his belief is that the resolution of conflicts between hypotheses and observations can only be a matter of the collective judgment of scientists, in each individual case.

Question: What kind of criteria frequently used in science complicates the definitiveness of some hypotheses' falsification?
Answer: statistical

Question: What other flaws complicate the problem of identifying faulty scientific hypotheses?
Answer: flaws in the evidence

Question: According to Popper, what resolves conflicting hypotheses and observations in the long run?
Answer: the collective judgment of scientists

Question: What is always possible to do?

Question: What is always clear if evidence contradicts a hypothesis?

Question: Who wrote a set of instructions that merely need to be followed diligently to achieve science?

Question: What is a matter of the judgement of a single scientist?

Question: What is a sign of flaws in the evidence?
Karl_Popper

In a book called Science Versus Crime, Houck writes that Popper's falsificationism can be questioned logically: it is not clear how Popper would deal with a statement like "for every metal, there is a temperature at which it will melt." The hypothesis cannot be falsified by any possible observation, for there will always be a higher temperature than tested at which the metal may in fact melt, yet it seems to be a valid scientific hypothesis. These examples were pointed out by Carl Gustav Hempel. Hempel came to acknowledge that Logical Positivism's verificationism was untenable, but argued that falsificationism was equally untenable on logical grounds alone. The simplest response to this is that, because Popper describes how theories attain, maintain and lose scientific status, individual consequences of currently accepted scientific theories are scientific in the sense of being part of tentative scientific knowledge, and both of Hempel's examples fall under this category. For instance, atomic theory implies that all metals melt at some temperature.

Question: Which book by Houck points out logical flaws in Popper's falsificationism?
Answer: Science Versus Crime

Question: Who argued that Popper's falsificationism was just as logically untenable as Logical Positivism's verificationism?
Answer: Carl Gustav Hempel

Question: Who wrote the book Science Versus Crime which challenged the logic of falsificationism?
Answer: Houck

Question: What did Popper write in Science Versus Crime?

Question: Who argued that falsificationism was defensible on logical grounds alone?

Question: What implies that not all metals melt?

Question: What was tenable on logical grounds alone?

Question: What can always be tested at a lower temperature?
Karl_Popper

In 2004, philosopher and psychologist Michel ter Hark (Groningen, The Netherlands) published a book, called Popper, Otto Selz and the rise of evolutionary epistemology, in which he claimed that Popper took some of his ideas from his tutor, the German psychologist Otto Selz. Selz never published his ideas, partly because of the rise of Nazism, which forced him to quit his work in 1933, and the prohibition of referring to Selz' work. Popper, the historian of ideas and his scholarship, is criticised in some academic quarters for his rejection of Plato, Hegel and Marx.

Question: Which German psychologist and tutor of Popper may have originated some of Popper's ideas?
Answer: Otto Selz

Question: Who claimed Otto Selz deserved credit for ideas published by Popper?
Answer: Michel ter Hark

Question: What contributed to Otto Selz's cessation of work in 1933?
Answer: the rise of Nazism

Question: What is the name of the 2004 paper that links Popper's work to that of his tutor Otto Selz?
Answer: Popper, Otto Selz and the rise of evolutionary epistemology

Question: Popper is criticized for dismissing which major philosophers in his work?
Answer: Plato, Hegel and Marx

Question: What book did Popper publish in 2004?

Question: Who did Hark claim that Selz took his ideas from?

Question: Why did Selz publish his ideas?

Question: When did Selz start his work?

Question: What is Popper praised for in some academic quarters?
Karl_Popper

According to John N. Gray, Popper held that "a theory is scientific only in so far as it is falsifiable, and should be given up as soon as it is falsified." By applying Popper's account of scientific method, Gray's Straw Dogs states that this would have "killed the theories of Darwin and Einstein at birth." When they were first advanced, Gray claims, each of them was "at odds with some available evidence; only later did evidence become available that gave them crucial support." Against this, Gray seeks to establish the irrationalist thesis that "the progress of science comes from acting against reason."

Question: Which two prominent scientists advanced theories that John N. Gray claims would never have survived the scientific method Popper describes?
Answer: Darwin and Einstein

Question: Which work by John Gray challenges Popper's falsificationism?
Answer: Straw Dogs

Question: According to Gray, what should have falsified Einstein and Darwin's theories when first proposed?
Answer: available evidence

Question: What kind of thesis does Gray advance about scientific progress?
Answer: irrationalist

Question: What did John Gray say according to Popper?

Question: Whose theories were compatible with all available evidence when they were introduced?

Question: What is the rationalist thesis?

Question: Where does Popper state this would have "killed the theories of Darwin and Einstein at birth."?

Question: What thesis does Popper seek to establish?
Karl_Popper

Gray does not, however, give any indication of what available evidence these theories were at odds with, and his appeal to "crucial support" illustrates the very inductivist approach to science that Popper sought to show was logically illegitimate. For, according to Popper, Einstein's theory was at least equally as well corroborated as Newton's upon its initial conception; they both equally well accounted for all the hitherto available evidence. Moreover, since Einstein also explained the empirical refutations of Newton's theory, general relativity was immediately deemed suitable for tentative acceptance on the Popperian account. Indeed, Popper wrote, several decades before Gray's criticism, in reply to a critical essay by Imre Lakatos:

Question: Gray's approach aligns with which approach that Popper himself considered untenable?
Answer: inductivist

Question: A possible rebuttal to Gray's argument appears in Popper's reply to which philosopher?
Answer: Imre Lakatos

Question: What did general relativity do that made it tentatively acceptable when it was proposed?
Answer: explained the empirical refutations of Newton's theory

Question: In contrast to Gray, which theory did Popper argue was at least equally consistent with Newton's on the available evidence?
Answer: Einstein's theory

Question: What does Gray give an indication of?

Question: What did Popper seek to show was logically legitimate?

Question: Whose theory was less well corroborated than Newton's on it's conception?

Question: What was not deemed suitable for tentative acceptance?

Question: Who wrote several decades after Gray's criticism?
Karl_Popper

Such a theory would be true with higher probability, because it cannot be attacked so easily: to falsify the first one, it is sufficient to find that the sun has stopped rising; to falsify the second one, one additionally needs the assumption that the given day has not yet been reached. Popper held that it is the least likely, or most easily falsifiable, or simplest theory (attributes which he identified as all the same thing) that explains known facts that one should rationally prefer. His opposition to positivism, which held that it is the theory most likely to be true that one should prefer, here becomes very apparent. It is impossible, Popper argues, to ensure a theory to be true; it is more important that its falsity can be detected as easily as possible.

Question: Which type of theory is most falsifiable?
Answer: simplest

Question: What school of philosophy does Popper's thinking on induction oppose?
Answer: positivism

Question: For Popper, knowing that a theory is true is what?
Answer: impossible

Question: What quality of a useful theory must be easily detectable?
Answer: its falsity

Question: Why would a theory be true with lower probability?

Question: What did Popper hold that one should do with the most likely theory?

Question: Who supported positivism?

Question: Who argues it is possible to ensure that a theory is true?

Question: What is less important than detecting the falsity of a theory?
Karl_Popper

In his early years Popper was impressed by Marxism, whether of Communists or socialists. An event that happened in 1919 had a profound effect on him: During a riot, caused by the Communists, the police shot several unarmed people, including some of Popper's friends, when they tried to free party comrades from prison. The riot had, in fact, been part of a plan by which leaders of the Communist party with connections to Béla Kun tried to take power by a coup; Popper did not know about this at that time. However, he knew that the riot instigators were swayed by the Marxist doctrine that class struggle would produce vastly more dead men than the inevitable revolution brought about as quickly as possible, and so had no scruples to put the life of the rioters at risk to achieve their selfish goal of becoming the future leaders of the working class. This was the start of his later criticism of historicism. Popper began to reject Marxist historicism, which he associated with questionable means, and later socialism, which he associated with placing equality before freedom (to the possible disadvantage of equality).

Question: Who instigated the 1919 riot that reshaped Popper's political views?
Answer: Communists

Question: The 1919 riot involving Popper's comrades was part of what larger political move?
Answer: a coup

Question: Popper's critique of which doctrine has its origins in first-hand observation of communist agitation?
Answer: historicism

Question: Which historically significant communist activist was associated with the 1919 riots in which some of Popper's friends were killed?
Answer: Béla Kun

Question: What did the Marxist rioters believe would cause more death and suffering than their own agitation?
Answer: class struggle

Question: What year did the Communists stop a riot from occurring?

Question: What was Popper impressed by in his later years?

Question: How many armed people did the police shoot?

Question: What did Popper associate with noble means?

Question: What did Popper think placed freedom before equality?
Mandolin

A mandolin (Italian: mandolino pronounced [mandoˈliːno]; literally "small mandola") is a musical instrument in the lute family and is usually plucked with a plectrum or "pick". It commonly has four courses of doubled metal strings tuned in unison (8 strings), although five (10 strings) and six (12 strings) course versions also exist. The courses are normally tuned in a succession of perfect fifths. It is the soprano member of a family that includes the mandola, octave mandolin, mandocello and mandobass.

Question: What country did the mandolin originate from?
Answer: Italian

Question: What does mandolin translate to? 
Answer: small mandola

Question: What musical family does the mandolin come from?
Answer: lute family

Question: How is the mandolin usually played?
Answer: usually plucked with a plectrum or "pick"

Question: How many courses does a mandolin commonly have? 
Answer: four

Question: What is the Italian word for mandolino?

Question: What family is the lute in?

Question: What else does the family include in addition to the lute and mandolin?

Question: What material is the lute's strings made of?

Question: What city did the mandolin originate from?

Question: What does mandoleen translate to?

Question:  What musical sister does the mandolin have?

Question:  How is the mandolin not usually played?

Question:  How many courses does a mandolin not commonly have?
Mandolin

There are many styles of mandolin, but four are common, the Neapolitan or round-backed mandolin, the carved-top mandolin and the flat-backed mandolin. The round-back has a deep bottom, constructed of strips of wood, glued together into a bowl. The carved-top or arch-top mandolin has a much shallower, arched back, and an arched top—both carved out of wood. The flat-backed mandolin uses thin sheets of wood for the body, braced on the inside for strength in a similar manner to a guitar. Each style of instrument has its own sound quality and is associated with particular forms of music. Neapolitan mandolins feature prominently in European classical music and traditional music. Carved-top instruments are common in American folk music and bluegrass music. Flat-backed instruments are commonly used in Irish, British and Brazilian folk music. Some modern Brazilian instruments feature an extra fifth course tuned a fifth lower than the standard fourth course.

Question: What are the four common styles of mandolins?
Answer: the Neapolitan or round-backed mandolin, the carved-top mandolin and the flat-backed mandolin.

Question: What is the round-back mandolin made of? 
Answer: strips of wood, glued together into a bowl

Question: Which style of mandolin has a shallower, arched back, and arched top?
Answer: round-back

Question: Which form of music do Neapolitan mandolins feature? 
Answer: European classical music and traditional music.

Question: Which mandolin is commin in American Folk music and blue grass music?
Answer: Carved-top instruments

Question: What type of mandolin has a deep bottom and an arched top?

Question: What type of mandolin has an arched back and is braced on the side?

Question: What type of American music are the Neapolitan mandolins featured in?

Question: What type of European music are the Carved-top instruments featured in?

Question:  What are the four uncommon styles of mandolins?

Question:  What is the round-front mandolin made of?

Question: Which style of mandolin has a deeper, arched back, and arched top?

Question:  Which form of music do Neapolitan mandolins not feature?

Question: Which mandolin is uncommon in American Folk music and blue grass music?
Mandolin

Much of mandolin development revolved around the soundboard (the top). Pre-mandolin instruments were quiet instruments, strung with as many as six courses of gut strings, and were plucked with the fingers or with a quill. However, modern instruments are louder—using four courses of metal strings, which exert more pressure than the gut strings. The modern soundboard is designed to withstand the pressure of metal strings that would break earlier instruments. The soundboard comes in many shapes—but generally round or teardrop-shaped, sometimes with scrolls or other projections. There is usually one or more sound holes in the soundboard, either round, oval, or shaped like a calligraphic F (f-hole). A round or oval sound hole may be covered or bordered with decorative rosettes or purfling.

Question: What did most of the development of the mandolin revolve around?
Answer: soundboard (the top)

Question: Were premandolins quiet or loud instruments? 
Answer: quiet instruments

Question: What are modern mandolins' strings made of? 
Answer: four courses of metal strings,

Question: What is the most common soundboard shape?
Answer: generally round or teardrop-shaped

Question: What are the sound holes covered with? 
Answer: bordered with decorative rosettes or purfling

Question: What is another term for the bottom of the mandolin?

Question: What was louder than modern instruments?

Question: How are teardrop-shaped holes covered or bordered?

Question: How many courses of metal strings were pre-mandolin instruments strung with?

Question: What did most of the development of the mandolin not revolve around?

Question:  Were postmandolins quiet or loud instruments?

Question:  What are ancient mandolins' strings made of?

Question:  What is the most uncommon soundboard shape?

Question:  What are the sound holes opened with?
Mandolin

Beside the introduction of the lute to Spain (Andalusia) by the Moors, another important point of transfer of the lute from Arabian to European culture was Sicily, where it was brought either by Byzantine or later by Muslim musicians. There were singer-lutenists at the court in Palermo following the Norman conquest of the island from the Muslims, and the lute is depicted extensively in the ceiling paintings in the Palermo’s royal Cappella Palatina, dedicated by the Norman King Roger II of Sicily in 1140. His Hohenstaufen grandson Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor (1194 - 1250) continued integrating Muslims into his court, including Moorish musicians. By the 14th century, lutes had disseminated throughout Italy and, probably because of the cultural influence of the Hohenstaufen kings and emperor, based in Palermo, the lute had also made significant inroads into the German-speaking lands.

Question: Who introduced the lute to Spain?
Answer: the Moors

Question: What country helped transfer the lute from Arabian to European culture? 
Answer: Sicily

Question: Who brought the lute to Sicily?
Answer: Byzantine or later by Muslim musicians

Question: What court held singer-lutenists after the Norman conquest?
Answer: Palermo

Question: What building has ceeiling painting dedicated to the lutenists? 
Answer: Palermo’s royal Cappella Palatina,

Question: Who was the Holy Roman Emperor from 1190-1254?

Question: Who was the Palermo's royal Capella Palatina dedicated by in 1104?

Question: Who did Spain introduce the lute to?

Question: What is another term for Moors?

Question: Who introduced the lute to England?

Question: What country helped transfer the lute from Arabian to Asian culture?

Question:  Who brought the lute to France?

Question:  What court held singer-lutenists before the Norman conquest?

Question:  What store has floor painting dedicated to the lutenists?