Karl Popper: The Scientific Method

According to Karl Popper, the scientific method has three components: problem, proposed solutions to the problems, and criticism to the proposed solution. He argued that instead of empirical observation and then development of the theory, scientific activity starts with a problem and the problem determines what observations scientists will make. Next comes the proposed solutions to the problem and then you find fault with the proposed solution. According to Popper, for a theory to be considered scientific it must be refutable (principle of falsifiability). The theory should generate a hypothesis that is falsifiable, meaning it can be proven wrong. Also for a theory to be considered scientific, it must make risky predictions, meaning predictions derived from a scientific theory that run a real chance of showing the theory to be false. Theories that do not

Kuhn believed that most members of a science commonly share viewpoints, and these common sets of beliefs about a subject matter are called paradigms. Scientific activity is guided by a paradigm that scientists believe to be true. Once a paradigm is accepted, scientists can explore the implications of that paradigm (normal science). Normal science is like a problem solving because it works on a problem specified by a paradigm, the problem have guaranteed solutions, and certain rules must be followed in arriving to the solutions. For a paradigm to change, first there must anomalies or persistent observations that an accepted paradigm cannot explain. These anomalies eventually cause one paradigm to displace and another to take is place. According to Kuhn there are three stages for scientific progress to occur. (1) Preparadigmatic stage in which a number of competing viewpoints exist. (2) Paradigmatic stage in which puzzle solving activities occur or normal science. (3) Revolutionary stage, in which an existing paradigm is displaced by another