Speech by Dr. Reza Gholami at the House of Iranian Wisdom in Vienna, Monday, November 18, 2024
To begin, I honor World Philosophy Day, which UNESCO has proposed as an opportunity to reflect and engage in dialogue about humanity’s fundamental questions. This day reminds us that philosophy is not merely an academic field but a way of life—a way that invites us to think, analyze, seek truth, and free ourselves from all forms of slavery and captivity.
In today’s world, where rapid changes and superficial thinking are increasingly prevalent, philosophy has become even more significant. Philosophy helps us resist superficiality and instead embrace deeper thinking.
Karl Popper once said, “Philosophy is the love of knowledge, and knowledge is the beginning of freedom.” Yet, it is undeniable that knowledge and freedom are only achieved through critical thinking and the willingness to be challenged—concepts that lie at the heart of Popper’s philosophy of science.
Today, alongside celebrating philosophy, we have a duty to think about its challenges, flaws, and, at the same time, its unparalleled achievements. Thus, let us delve into Karl Popper’s thoughts, his unique approach to truth, and his method of coming closer to it.
Part One: The Meaning of Truth
Philosophy has always begun with the question of truth. From Socrates, who asked people, “What is truth?”, to modern philosophers like Popper, who taught us that truth is only achieved through trial and error, philosophy has played a vital role in illuminating the human path and confronting individuals with truth.
For Popper, truth is not something easily attained or something that can be encapsulated in fixed and absolute forms. He sees truth as something that must be continuously tested, examined, and revisited over time.
In essence, it seems that Popper does not fundamentally disagree with defining truth as correspondence with reality. He does not deny the existence of absolute reality in the world but offers a fresh interpretation of how truth can correspond with reality. His approach aligns with the capacities of human understanding and the obstacles that continually challenge it.
Part Two: Humanity’s Need to Approach Truth
Humans seek truth in life, and this quest gives them peace of mind. However, Popper believed that humans never achieve absolute truth; instead, they are always in the process of approaching it. He viewed science not as a fixed and definitive process but as a method for coming closer to the truth.
This approach, as observed in the natural sciences, results from continuous experimentation and revision, and in philosophy, humanities, and social sciences, it stems from constant criticism and re-evaluation. The belief that humans can come closer to truth is far better than denying the existence of truth altogether or doubting the possibility of understanding it.
Part Three: The Possibility or Impossibility of Reaching Truth
While Popper believed in the approach to truth, he did not speak of fully attaining it. In his view, we can never reach final and absolute truth. Even with scientific advancements, we only arrive at new tests and more reliable hypotheses—not ultimate truth.
Nonetheless, we should not underestimate the value of approaching truth. Popper’s methodology reassures us that the path we are taking is largely correct, as it has shown resilience against falsification and criticism.
In summary, Karl Popper emphasized the importance of “approaching truth” while critiquing dogmatic thinking. He believed that truth is not a fixed destination but a dynamic process in which theories are continually reviewed, criticized, and refined. Science and philosophy, rather than searching for absolute truth, should focus on constant improvement and correction.
Part Four: The Link Between Science and Philosophy as a Path to Truth
Science and philosophy have always served as tools for the pursuit of truth. Philosophy is not only a collection of theories and perspectives but also a method of thinking and questioning. This philosophical approach helps us resist superficial appearances and search for truth in the depths of issues.
On the other hand, science, by uncovering the laws of nature and addressing practical human needs, can guide philosophy with realism.
Part Five: Karl Popper and the Idea of Falsifiability
One of the key concepts Karl Popper introduced to the philosophy of science is the idea of falsifiability as a criterion for distinguishing science from pseudoscience. Popper, one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century, presented falsifiability as a measure of scientific validity.
According to this idea, for a theory to be scientifically valid, it must be testable and capable of being disproved if incorrect. In other words, theories must be open to testing and revision to contribute to scientific progress and the approach to truth.
With this perspective, Popper freed science from mere confirmatory thinking. He argued that the goal of science is not the definitive confirmation of theories but the ongoing search to disprove them. This revolutionary perspective transformed scientific methodology and provided clearer criteria for evaluating theories.
Popper emphasized that the more bold and precise scientific theories are, the more they are exposed to falsification, thereby increasing their accuracy and predictive power. In this framework, Popper’s epistemology shifts the focus from seeking final truth to seeking better theories through continual correction.
Science progresses through criticism and new experiments, and this process must continue to achieve deeper and better understandings of reality.
Part Six: Karl Popper and the Idea of Criticism
Popper not only emphasized falsifiability but also introduced “criticism” as a fundamental principle of scientific thinking. In his view, no theory should be accepted as absolute truth. This perspective also applies to social and human sciences, as well as political systems and governance, where ideas and theories must always be open to scrutiny and revision to enable improvement and prevent totalitarianism.
Let me also mention (in parentheses) that, from this perspective, even coming closer to the truth is not equivalent to the agreement of rational individuals. In Popper’s view, such agreement alone has no epistemological validity. The core of this perspective suggests that approaching the truth means being more open to criticism and having greater ability to withstand fundamental challenges.
Part Seven: Distinguishing Falsifiability (Natural Sciences) from Criticism (Philosophy and Humanities)
While falsifiability is highly useful in natural sciences, it faces limitations in humanities, which deal with cultural and historical complexities. In the humanities, concepts are often more abstract and less testable, making criticism a more appropriate criterion than falsifiability. However, it seems difficult to draw a precise distinction between falsifiability and criticism.
Part Eight: Popper’s Understanding of the Relationship Between Philosophy and Science
- Science as a Dynamic and Falsifiable Process:
Popper viewed science as a dynamic process always subject to testing and correction, rather than a collection of definitive facts.
- Criticism and the Evolution of Science:
Philosophy plays a critical role in revising and reviewing science. According to Popper, science grows through constructive criticism.
Criticism, of course, requires that the critic analyze the theory within its own logical and conceptual framework. Without a precise understanding, it is impossible to offer valid and meaningful criticism.
In simpler terms, for a scientific theory to be properly tested, its concepts and claims must be clearly and accurately understood. According to Popper, criticism is only valid when it helps test the theory and reveals its real weaknesses.
This perspective is rooted in the principles of analytic philosophy, as Popper himself was an analytic philosopher. Analytic philosophy consistently emphasizes conceptual clarity, linguistic precision, and logical reasoning because, without exaggeration, more than fifty percent of criticisms of theories in the world of science are made without a clear and proper understanding of the theory.
- Pursuing Truth Through Gradual Refinement:
For Popper, science constantly seeks truth, though this truth is never final. Philosophy helps by offering methods like criticism and revision to refine scientific theories.
- Critique and Self-Criticism in Science:
Philosophy allows science to evaluate itself from different perspectives, ensuring progress toward better and more valid theories.
In conclusion, the relationship between philosophy and science in Popper’s approach, particularly through the frameworks of “falsifiability” and “criticism,” aims for an endless and evolving search for truth. Philosophy supports science in its journey of continuous refinement and advancement.
Section Nine: Criticisms of Popper’s Falsifiability Theory and Philosophy
Despite the remarkable contributions of Popper’s falsifiability theory to science and philosophy, it has faced several criticisms. These critiques seem to have room for further exploration. Here are some of them:
- Lack of Alignment with the History of Science:
Critics like Thomas Kuhn argue that scientific progress often occurs through revolutionary changes or paradigm shifts rather than merely through falsification of theories. However, this critique seems less compelling because, firstly, Kuhn’s view of the history of science appears dogmatic. Who can claim that all of the history of science has strictly followed Kuhn’s theory of scientific revolutions? Secondly, falsifiability inherently accommodates revolutionary shifts. In other words, a high degree of falsification of foundational theories can itself lead to paradigm shifts.
- Ambiguity in the Criteria of Falsifiability:
Precisely defining the criteria for falsifiability can be challenging, and some theories might evade falsification through various adjustments. This criticism seems somewhat valid, and researchers could work further on enhancing the precision and inclusiveness of these criteria.
- Limitations in Social and Human Sciences:
This approach may have limited applicability in the humanities, which deal with cultural and social complexities. However, this critique is not particularly convincing, especially when one understands Popper’s perspective on social and human sciences.
- Criticism of the Negative Focus on Hypothesis Rejection:
Popper placed significant emphasis on rejecting hypotheses. However, some critics argue that the gradual confirmation of hypotheses is also an essential part of science. This point is valid, but in Popper’s view, confirmation of hypotheses is meaningful only in the context of their resistance to refutation. A hypothesis that shows resilience against falsification may, as long as this resilience persists, be considered tentatively confirmed.
- Criticism of Extreme Relativism:
The criticism that Popper’s epistemology leads to an extreme relativism that makes everything in philosophy and science unstable is a superficial and mistaken interpretation. On the contrary, Popper brought relativism to a realistic and useful point. Unlike radical views of relativism, Popper’s approach does not harm scientific progress or its productivity.
Section Ten: Popper’s Contributions to Epistemology
Popper’s ideas have had significant impacts on various fields of philosophy and science. Some of his most important contributions include:
- Knowledge as a Dynamic Process:
Popper presented knowledge not as a final product but as a dynamic and ever-changing process.
- Falsifiability as a Criterion of Science:
By introducing falsifiability as the criterion for distinguishing science from non-science, Popper directed science toward precision and continuous testing.
- Emphasis on Criticism and Openness:
Criticism holds a central position in Popper’s thought, fostering openness in the philosophy of social and human sciences.
- Enhancing the Precision of Scientific Theories:
Popper encouraged scientists to propose clearer and more precise theories by introducing the criterion of falsifiability. This prevented ambiguity and unscientific ideas from spreading within knowledge.
- Strengthening the Methodology for Evaluating Theories:
Popper provided a framework to help researchers systematically test and evaluate theories, thus enhancing the potential for scientific progress.
- Recognizing the Fallibility of Science and Preventing Dogmatism:
Popper emphasized the fallibility of human knowledge, promoting humility in science and philosophy. His focus on continuous criticism helped prevent science from becoming dogmatic or mythological, aligning with the fundamental ideals of modernism. If applied, this approach ensures the openness and advancement of science.
- Revisiting Relativism and Combating Absolutism:
One of Popper’s key contributions was challenging the illusion of absolute certainty. He argued that no theory could claim ultimate certainty and that all human knowledge is, in essence, relative. However, Popper’s relativism differs from other forms of relativism because it neither undermines the foundation of science nor halts its pursuit of knowledge.
- Highlighting the Role of Hypotheses in Science:
Popper emphasized the importance of bold hypothesis-making, showing that scientific progress depends on testing innovative hypotheses and striving to refute them.
- Promoting Intellectual Openness and Dialogue:
Popper advocated for a culture of criticism and dialogue as prerequisites for the advancement of knowledge and philosophy. This requires mutual respect, tolerance, and openness to critique.
Section Eleven: Popper’s Critique of Authoritarianism and Absolutism
In political philosophy, Popper was one of the strongest critics of authoritarianism and autocratic regimes. In works such as The Open Society and Its Enemies, he criticized political and social philosophies that emphasize absolute power and unilateral decision-making. For Popper, authoritarianism is inherently incompatible with criticism and stems from absolutist thinking.
In contrast to authoritarianism, Popper defended the concept of the open society. He believed that in an open society, everyone should have the freedom to critique, and even governments should be subject to constant oversight and criticism. According to Popper, intellectual and political freedom is essential because only under such conditions can a society identify its errors and move toward improvement.
Popper particularly stressed the importance of being open to criticism. He argued that no theory or social system should be accepted as absolute and beyond question. Against authoritarian perspectives, he championed the creation of open spaces for debate and critique, believing that only under such conditions can individuals and societies enjoy true freedoms.
In this regard, it is natural that applying double standards to freedom of criticism, according to Popper’s view, is a clear example of tyranny. Governments are not allowed to define forbidden topics for criticism or pressure critics openly or secretly for discussing those topics. This is something that some European governments are doing today, especially when it comes to criticizing the widespread crimes of Israel against humanity in Palestine.
Critique of Dogmatic Political Philosophies
Popper criticized political philosophies like Marxism and fascism, which implicitly assume that a single ideology or political theory can dominate all aspects of society. He viewed Marxism as a dogmatic and authoritarian philosophy that leaves no room for critique or change. Popper strongly opposed such views, emphasizing that all philosophical and political systems must be open to criticism and revision.
Summary
Popper’s contributions to epistemology and his critique of authoritarianism can be summarized in six key points:
- Truth as a Dynamic Process:
According to Popper, truth is not a fixed destination but a process that approaches accuracy through testing, criticism, and falsifiability. Science should focus on constant correction and improvement rather than seeking absolute truth.
- Scientific Progress Through Falsification:
Scientific theories must be testable and falsifiable. In other words, science progresses not by confirming theories but by attempting to refute them.
- Criticism as the Foundation of Scientific Thinking:
No theory should be accepted absolutely. Theories must always be subject to review and criticism to allow for correction and progress. This principle is equally important in social and human sciences.
- The Open Society and Intellectual Freedom:
As a critic of authoritarianism, Popper emphasized that in an open society, individuals and governments must be subject to constant criticism and oversight to identify errors and move toward improvement. Intellectual and political freedom is essential for growth and reform. Moreover, no double standards should be imposed by authorities regarding freedom, especially the freedom to criticize. Equal opportunity for critique, regardless of power or position, is fundamental to maintaining an open and just society.
- Opposition to Authoritarianism and Dogmatism:
Popper strongly criticized dogmatic political philosophies such as Marxism and fascism that insist on a single ideology or theory. He stressed the importance of critique and revision in all philosophical and political systems.
- Science and Philosophy as Dynamic and Corrective Processes:
Instead of pursuing absolute truth, Popper argued that the aim of science and philosophy should be continuous improvement and correction. This process relies on constructive criticism and the recognition of human fallibility.
Thank you for your attention.