This essay aims to clarify and alliterate the differences in the arguments and theories of the alternating scientific procedures expressed by the empiricist philosophers Hume and Popper. Additionally, I have added the thoughts of Kuhn, a historian of science and of Feyerabend, an extremist philosopher who both provide their own opinions to the nature of science. Finally, I offer my own humble opinions and answer the above question after talking in depth about the topic …
showed first 75 words of 1883 total

showed last 75 words of 1883 total
…his hypothesis superior to the original one he based it on. It is therefore that Popper has not provided an answer to the problems Hume classifies; he has simply found an alternative way of thinking about the basis and build up of science that in my opinion has a more solid foundation, as it covers a wider range of scientific areas and does not have as many theoretical problems as with induction. (c) 2004 Mark Fulton