The Unresolved Bridge Problem Essay -- Philosopher Karl Popper

Philosopher Karl Popper, an inductive skeptic, is criticized by his objection to balk. Rather than victimisation the terminal figure confirmation to cite a theory that has continued to be proven correctly, Popper created his own term. Popper phrases that corroboration is a term used to describe theories that have been well-tried and not yet falsified. According to Peter Godfrey-Smith (G-S), Popper plenty say why we should prefer to use a theory that has not been falsified over a theory that has been falsified (Smith 68). The problem with Popper lies when he is presented with two theories, incomplete of which has been falsified. This is when Popper has difficulty choosing genius theory over another. This situation can be better understood by looking at the bridge problem. I will argue that Popper is inefficient to solve the bridge problem using corroboration because the term is alike with confirmation. There atomic number 18 two theories (T1 possibleness One) and (T2 possibility Two) that have different implications for how to build a bridge. These two theories are similar because they both have not been falsified however they differ because one has been tested and the other has not. The theories are stated explicitly below.T1 Theory that has been tested many times and has neer been falsifiedT2 Theory that has never been tested and has never been falsifiedNext we can contourally reconstruct the argument in modus ponens form as follows (P1)If T1 is corroborated, then T1 is rational(P2)T1 is corroborated(C)T1 is rationalBefore I say what is wrong with the argument, I want to exempt the bridge objection. In Theory and Reality, G-S presents the bridge problem, which is a response to Popper made by inductivists. I chose to explain this... ...t his term corroboration is synonymous to confirmation.In conclusion, I have argued that Popper is unable to solve the volleyball problem using corroboration because the term is synonymous with corroboration and Popper denies confirmation. Granted, there must be more to what Popper thinks of corroboration, we have no reason from the readings to see why the two terms corroboration and confirmation differ. Until Popper says more about corroboration we are entitled to treat the term as equivalent in meaning to confirmationWork CitedBlackmon, James. sing 13 Confirmation. philosophy 30. UC DAVIS. Davis, 5 Nov2013. Blackmon, James. Lecture 17 Poppers Bridge. Philosophy 30. UC DAVIS. Davis, 26 Nov2013. Godfrey-Smith, Peter. Theory and Reality An Introduction to thePhilosophy of Science. Chicago University of Chicago, 2003. Print.