UCLNLP/adversarial_qa huggingface dataset:
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 does Popper what to make sure people don't think his evaluation rely upon?
Answer: subjective probabilities" or other merely "epistemic" considerations

Question: What can be compared to each other to determine specifically how much truer one is?
Answer: scientific theories

Question: What way did Popper want to calculate things that is the opposite of subjective?
Answer: objectively

Question: What can allow you to determine whether something may be successful or not?
Answer: the amount of truth and falsity that they imply

Question: What ratio is presented here?
Answer: logical content is inversely proportional to probability

Question: Where did the fancy word for truth come from?
Answer: Popper

Question: Is the theory based more on subjective thought, quantitative measurements, or epistemic considerations?
Answer: quantitative

Question: What amount of importance is given to subjective observation in the theory?
Answer: nothing

Question: What requires instinct to understand?
Answer: The intuitive idea behind verisimilitude

Question: Popper advocated for what, not qualitative, in determining truth?
Answer: quantitative

Question: What are not acceptable methods?
Answer: Popper emphasises forcefully, has nothing to do with "subjective probabilities" or other merely "epistemic" considerations

Question: What is a fancy term related to truth?
Answer: verisimilitude

Question: Popper defined?
Answer: verisimilitude

Question: Popper was against the epistemic or?
Answer: subjective probabilities

Question: To measure something in a non-subjective way means you are looking at it through what kind of means?
Answer: quantitative
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: What does Popper call the change in the eating habits of the giraffe?
Answer: evolution from within

Question: A different view of evolution from within is?
Answer: evolution from without

Question: What is natural selection working in combination with the new behaviour?
Answer: evolution from within

Question: What does popper base his notion on
Answer: the "hopeful monster" that has large phenotype mutations and calls it the "hopeful behavioural monster"

Question: How would evolution be active to an animal according to Popper?
Answer: the organism actively trying to discover new ways of life and being on a quest for conquering new ecological niches)

Question: How does the enviroment interact with apssive organisms according to popper?
Answer: only trying to kill the mostly passive organism, or perhaps segregate some of its groups

Question: Who does Popper take some of his ideas from?
Answer: Darwinism

Question: How did Popper describe natural evolution?
Answer: the picture of a hostile environment only trying to kill the mostly passive organism, or perhaps segregate some of its groups

Question: The hopeful monster is also?
Answer: hopeful behavioural monster

Question: What would explain rapid change of a phenotype?
Answer: natural selection working in combination with the new behaviour
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: What is the relationship of Otto to Popper?
Answer: tutor

Question: Who brought the theft of Otto's ideas to light?
Answer: Michel ter Hark

Question: What might be used by a student as financial aid to cover tuitions or educational costs?
Answer: scholarship

Question: What might lead you to believe that someone stole someone else's work, basically plagiarizing ideas?
Answer: Popper took some of his ideas from his tutor

Question: The study of knowledge is also referred to as?
Answer: epistemology

Question: A famous advocate for communism was which individual?
Answer: Marx

Question: Because of the rise of Nazism, why wasn't Selz work available?
Answer: which forced him to quit his work in 1933

Question: A philosopher from Germany during the 18th century was called?
Answer: Hegel

Question: Where is Popper's ideas criticized?
Answer: academic quarters

Question: A political ideaology that prevaled among the Axis Powers of World War 2 was called?
Answer: Nazism

Question: What might lead you to believe that Selz might have been Jewish?
Answer: 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

Question: What was Selz associated with by Hark?
Answer: epistemology

Question: Selz was whose tutor?
Answer: Popper
Karl_Popper

Logically, no number of positive outcomes at the level of experimental testing can confirm a scientific theory, but a single counterexample is logically decisive: it shows the theory, from which the implication is derived, to be false. To say that a given statement (e.g., the statement of a law of some scientific theory) -- [call it "T"] -- is "falsifiable" does not mean that "T" is false. Rather, it means that, if "T" is false, then (in principle), "T" could be shown to be false, by observation or by experiment. Popper's account of the logical asymmetry between verification and falsifiability lies at the heart of his philosophy of science. It also inspired him to take falsifiability as his criterion of demarcation between what is, and is not, genuinely scientific: a theory should be considered scientific if, and only if, it is falsifiable. This led him to attack the claims of both psychoanalysis and contemporary Marxism to scientific status, on the basis that their theories are not falsifiable.

Question: Which of the following is not a possible outcome of experimental testing: positive outcomes, the statement of a law or a counterexample?
Answer: statement of a law

Question: What did Popper set as his rule to determine if a theory is scientific?
Answer: a theory should be considered scientific if, and only if, it is falsifiable

Question: How can one tell if a scientific hypothesis is properly structured?
Answer: a theory should be considered scientific if, and only if, it is falsifiable

Question: If a person says a theory is falsifiable, what does this mean in terms of the theory?
Answer: could be shown to be false

Question: Can a scientific theory ever be definitely proven?
Answer: no number of positive outcomes at the level of experimental testing can confirm a scientific theory

Question: What purportedly scientific theories did Popper criticize based upon his philosphy of science?
Answer: the claims of both psychoanalysis and contemporary Marxism

Question: How do you know if something is falsifiable that it is not necessarily false?
Answer: (in principle), "T" could be shown to be false

Question: How is something proven to be false?
Answer: by observation or by experiment

Question: What does being "falsifiable" not mean?
Answer: to be false

Question: What happens when something is false?
Answer: a theory should be considered scientific

Question: What number of counterexamples at the level of experimental testing can prove a scientific theory false?
Answer: a single counterexample

Question: Which of the following qualities is not necessary for a theory to be scientific: falsifiable or logical?
Answer: logical

Question: Which of the following was not attacked as unscientific: psychoanalysis, philosophy or Marxism?
Answer: philosophy
Karl_Popper

Popper held that rationality is not restricted to the realm of empirical or scientific theories, but that it is merely a special case of the general method of criticism, the method of finding and eliminating contradictions in knowledge without ad-hoc-measures. According to this view, rational discussion about metaphysical ideas, about moral values and even about purposes is possible. Popper's student W.W. Bartley III tried to radicalise this idea and made the controversial claim that not only can criticism go beyond empirical knowledge, but that everything can be rationally criticised.

Question: Who made the less extreme claim, Popper or Bartley?
Answer: Popper

Question: Which of the following is not a type of theory: empirical, moral or scientific?
Answer: moral

Question: The person who radicalized an idea is the what to Popper?
Answer: student

Question: Who was Bartley III's professor?
Answer: Popper

Question: How were Popper's ideas twisted?
Answer: W.W. Bartley III tried to radicalise this idea and made the controversial claim that not only can criticism go beyond empirical knowledge, but that everything can be rationally criticised

Question: Popper thinks it's possible to rationally think about?
Answer: metaphysical ideas, about moral values and even about purposes

Question: Which of the following is not a potential topic for rational discussion: metaphysical ideas, ad-hoc-measures or moral values?
Answer: ad-hoc-measures

Question: What did Bartley III study?
Answer: criticism

Question: What did Popper study?
Answer: rationality

Question: What idea is the overall topic of this passage?
Answer: rationality is not restricted to the realm of empirical or scientific theories

Question: What was Popper's theory in reference to non specifics?
Answer: eliminating contradictions in knowledge without ad-hoc-measures

Question: What characterizes rationality?
Answer: finding and eliminating contradictions in knowledge without ad-hoc-measures

Question: What is criticism?
Answer: the method of finding and eliminating contradictions in knowledge without ad-hoc-measures
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 was his theory?
Answer: a version of genetic pluralism

Question: What brings purpose into the world?
Answer: The goals

Question: What did this model show?
Answer: evolution

Question: What are genetic groups called?
Answer: phenotype

Question: What is used to achieve goals in living organisms?
Answer: control organ

Question: How does this relate to species?
Answer: living organisms themselves have goals, and act according to these goals, each guided by a central control

Question: What causes living things to want to do things in this model of evolution?
Answer: goals

Question: How do these changes affect the organism?
Answer: changes in behaviour

Question: What is more likely to kill an organism?
Answer: drastic changes of the phenotype

Question: What is an organism that has a smaller control organ?
Answer: amoeba

Question: How does the spearhead of evolution impact speices?
Answer: Mutations in the genes

Question: What all can be intensely changed by the structure of control?
Answer: behaviour, preferences and goals

Question: What kind of change is more risky for living things in terms of evolution?
Answer: drastic changes of the phenotype
Karl_Popper

Popper won many awards and honours in his field, including the Lippincott Award of the American Political Science Association, the Sonning Prize, the Otto Hahn Peace Medal of the United Nations Association of Germany in Berlin and fellowships in the Royal Society, British Academy, London School of Economics, King's College London, Darwin College, Cambridge, and Charles University, Prague. Austria awarded him the Grand Decoration of Honour in Gold for Services to the Republic of Austria in 1986, and the Federal Republic of Germany its Grand Cross with Star and Sash of the Order of Merit, and the peace class of the Order Pour le Mérite. He received the Humanist Laureate Award from the International Academy of Humanism. He was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 1965, and was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1976. He was invested with the Insignia of a Companion of Honour in 1982.

Question: For what reason was Popper able to call himself "Sir?"
Answer: He was knighted

Question: Berlin is in?
Answer: Germany

Question: Who can make someone a knight?
Answer: Queen Elizabeth II

Question: How do we know that Popper was respected by society?
Answer: Popper won many awards and honours in his field

Question: Popper gave what to Audstria?
Answer: Services

Question: How do we know Popper was good at his job?
Answer: Popper won many awards and honours in his field

Question: What tells us that Popper was very respected in his position?
Answer: Popper won many awards and honours in his field
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: What way of viewing theories in transition from myth to actual science to be detrimental to the advancement of theories?
Answer: dogmas

Question: Which work mentioned did Popper publish after an earlier work anticipated Kuhn's point?
Answer: Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge

Question: Popper argues that theories should be passed on with what?
Answer: a critical attitude

Question: How does the scientific approach work?
Answer: scientists necessarily develop their ideas within a definite theoretical framework

Question: What does Popper argue is the basis of scientific inquiry?
Answer: Science must begin with myths

Question: Who made the discovery?
Answer: Popper

Question: According to Popper, where does the scientific approach ultimately begin?
Answer: Science must begin with myths

Question: What could not be blindly believed?
Answer: myths

Question: How does Popper believe that scientific theories should be recieved by future researchers?
Answer: not as dogmas
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: How did Popper feel about justification?
Answer: He thinks that no assumption can ever be or needs ever to be justified

Question: According to Popper, what can we never have when it comes to theories?
Answer: certainty or justification

Question: What does Popper think that assumptions to not require?
Answer: justification

Question: What book did Popper write?
Answer: The Philosophy of Karl Popper

Question: Who opposed Popper?
Answer: philosophers

Question: What was Popper's official position on how justification is used in philosophy?
Answer: anti-justificationist
Professional_wrestling

Though they have not had the level of exposure as other wrestlers, bears have long been a part of professional wrestling. Usually declawed and muzzled, they often wrestled shoot matches against audience members, offered a cash reward if they could pin the bear. They also wrestled professionals in worked, often battle royal or handicap, matches (usually booked so the bear won). Though they have wrestled around the world and continue to do so, wrestling bears enjoyed their greatest popularity in the Southern United States, during the 1960s and 1970s. The practice of bear wrestling has met strong opposition from animal rights activists in recent decades, contributing to its lack of mainstream acceptance. As of 2006, it is banned in 20 U.S. states. Perhaps the most famous wrestling bears are Ginger, Victor, Hercules and Terrible Ted.

Question: Who is terrible ted?
Answer: bear

Question: Who is more popular than wrestling bears?
Answer: other wrestlers

Question: What would be required to make bear wrestling more popular?
Answer: mainstream acceptance

Question: Where has bear wrestling occurred?
Answer: around the world

Question: What is the status of bear wrestling in some places?
Answer: banned

Question: What do some people give bear wrestling?
Answer: opposition

Question: Where in the U.S. do bears fight?
Answer: Southern

Question: What is Victor?
Answer: bear

Question: How can you stop a bear from biting an audience member?
Answer: muzzled

Question: How does one prevent a wrestling bear from mauling an audience member who has chosen to fight it?
Answer: declawed and muzzled
Professional_wrestling

A countout (alternatively "count-out" or "count out") happens when a wrestler is out of the ring long enough for the referee to count to ten (twenty in some promotions) and thus disqualified. The count is broken and restarted when a wrestler in the ring exits the ring. Playing into this, some wrestlers will "milk" the count by sliding in the ring, and immediately sliding back out. As they were technically inside the ring for a split second before exiting again, it is sufficient to restart the count. This is often referred to by commentators as "breaking the count." Heels often use this tactic in order to buy themselves more time to catch their breath, or to attempt to frustrate their babyface opponents.

Question: What can be taken advantage of?
Answer: the count

Question: What is another way to write countout?
Answer: count-out

Question: How long does the player have to be outside the circle to be disqualified?
Answer: long enough for the referee to count to ten

Question: What are heels trying to do to their opponant?
Answer: frustrate

Question: How long do wrestlers have to step back in to start the counting over?
Answer: a split second

Question: What has different names?
Answer: countout

Question: How can a wrestler prevent being disqualified?
Answer: exits the ring

Question: What do some wrestlers do to the count?
Answer: "milk" the count