Re: Popper's 'Scientific' Irrationalism

Max More (
Wed, 19 Mar 1997 13:45:28 -0800

Stove's criticism of Popper looks way off base to me. Popper is no
irrationalist. In fact, by giving a defensible foundation to science rather
than the failed inductivist project, he protects it from irrationalist

Doing away with verifiability hardly means science can't make progress.
Popper is not Kuhn. The more that a scientific theory opens itself to
possible refutation (by making clear and broad claims that can be tested)
and yet continues to survive refutation, the better a theory it is. Popper
no doubt is not complete. Perhaps a better account of scientific progress
needs to be developed on a Popperian basis. (It would be a stimulating
project to combine Churchland's account of scientific progress with
Popper's account of the nature of science.)


Max More, Ph.D.
President, Extropy Institute, Editor, Extropy,
(310) 398-0375