Question by ?????: Does Popper argue in favor of metaphysical statements? Or does he just argue against the positivists?
I have the impression that his argument is circular because he claims that the positivists ignore the problem of induction when wanting to impose a binary demarcation of empirical/non empirical science, thus science/non science.
However, does he himself ignore that all metaphysical statements are inductive? Thus with his own argument against the positivists he crushes the possibliity of scientifically valid metaphysical statements.
Am I missing something?
Where does metaphysics stand for Karl Popper?
Best answer:
Answer by dmcmullan2000
Not all metaphysical statements are inductive. To suggest an entity as a first cause (God) cannot be inductive by its very nature.
Popper is often labelled a ‘rationalist’ for the life of me I don’t know why! Have a look at the Quine-Duhem thesis for a good (but not great) refutation of Popper. Or Kuhn.
Add your own answer in the comments!