Conjectures and refutations
the growth of scientific knowledge
by Karl Popper, Michelle Irene, de Launay Marc B., Melitta Mew · first published 1962
53% recommend47% neutral
Why HN recommends it
Popper's essays on the philosophy of science cover falsifiability and how scientific knowledge grows. Readers value its clear arguments on what separates science from pseudoscience and its take on objective truth.
Summarised by Claude from recommending comments
Affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Mentions per year
What Hacker News says
Related books
Meditations on First Philosophy
Rene Descartes
Recommended by 9 · mentioned by 269 recommend · 26 mention9 recommend · 269 recommend
2007–2024The Logic of Scientific Discovery
Karl Popper
Recommended by 15 · mentioned by 2615 recommend · 26 mention15 recommend · 2615 recommend
2009–2025Against Method
Paul K. Feyerabend
Recommended by 32 · mentioned by 7232 recommend · 72 mention32 recommend · 7232 recommend
2007–2024The fabric of reality
David Deutsch
Recommended by 23 · mentioned by 3623 recommend · 36 mention23 recommend · 3623 recommend
2007–2026The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Thomas S. Kuhn, Dennis Holland
Recommended by 96 · mentioned by 21596 recommend · 215 mention96 recommend · 21596 recommend
2009–2026The Beginning of Infinity
David Deutsch
Recommended by 77 · mentioned by 9177 recommend · 91 mention77 recommend · 9177 recommend
2007–2026Principia mathematica
Alfred North Whitehead, Bertrand Russell
Recommended by 9 · mentioned by 1619 recommend · 161 mention9 recommend · 1619 recommend
2007–2026The Black Swan
Nassim Nicholas Taleb, David Chandler
Recommended by 263 · mentioned by 666263 recommend · 666 mention263 recommend · 666263 recommend
I'd add Conjectures and Refutations (Karl Popper) The Fabric of Reality (David Deutsch) Also Feynman has some shorter/easier but serious physics books that some might prefer: QED and The Character of Physical Law. And his computation…
on “Reading list for those who love to learn” ↗"Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge" is my favorite work by Karl Popper. His 1945 work on the Paradox of Tolerance seems more appropriate here.
on “Twitter did not suspend Alex Jones or Infowars” ↗I would add: Conjectures and Refutations, by Karl Popper.
on “Philosophy of science books every computer scientist should read” ↗…interpretation of quantum mechanics, and its (in)famous motto: "Shut up and calculate"!) If you are interested in this line of reasoning, I found David Deutsch ("The beginning of infinity") and Karl Popper ("Conjectures and Refutations") two passionate (and opinionated) voices!
on “The Rise of Computer-Aided Explanation” ↗…what I just said, followed with what it's focus is which you ignored. Since you have a lot of questions and I don't really have the time to give a history lesson in science philosophy, you should read Conjectures and Refutations by Karl Popper if you are genuinely earnest with your inquiries to learn more.
on “New Evidence on When Bible Was Written” ↗You should read Karl Popper's Conjectures and Refutations. You can be open to new evidence defining what objective truth is without dismissing the existence of objective truth due to unknown unknowns.
on “How to Mislead with Facts” ↗…1969, in which Kuhne tries to answer some of the most pertinent criticisms of his theory. There are also alternative theories to all this, or at least different perspectives one can take. Karl Popper's Conjectures and Refutations is a good example.
on “Philosophy of science books every computer scientist should read” ↗…and illegitimate since 2016. If you were okay with all of that, but just object to this because of the outcome, you should look at why. It may be worth reading Public Opinion and Liberal Principles, Conjectures and Refutations, Chapter 17 by Karl Popper (https://pastebin.com/1JdawXUd)
on “Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers” ↗…processing. So I am quite involved in this. As far as I can tell, almost all of what Popper tried to do with quantification measures of information are exactly what you are talking about. In particular Conjectures and Refutations covers this really extensively so I'd recommend reading or re-reading that. Though Logic of Scientific Probability covers an early form. David Miller's Critical Rationalism covers it well too and some…
on “Human brain compresses working memories into low-res ‘summaries’” ↗…under freedom of movement, speech, self-defense, self-reliance, etc Not to nit pick, but while I'm picking nits. What you refer to is liberal democracy. Karl Popper explained this very well in his book Conjectures And Refutations: > The difference between a democracy and a tyranny is that under a democracy the government can be got rid of without bloodshed; under a tyranny it cannot. > Democracy as such cannot confer any benefits…
on “Switzerland Plans to Restrict the Use of Electric Cars During the Energy Crisis” ↗…preserve without prior of belief > 0.95". It's a novelty bias to choose "act to change without prior of belief > 0.95". But there are many modes of action in between. Knowledge is necessarily imperfect (cf. Conjectures and Refutations). The engineer/scientist difference isn't all that useful in reality. Even disciplines dominated by engineering rapidly see advances over time purely through process improvements which often manifest…
on “Science without Validation in a World without Meaning” ↗…on its theories; but it also passes on a critical attitude towards them. The theories are passed on, not as dogmas, but rather with the challenge to discuss them and improve upon them." Karl Popper, 'Conjectures and Refutations'
on “The Defeat of Reason” ↗Because those need attention. If I'm waiting for my Lyft to take me to my book club meeting, like I am right now, I only have three minutes. I can't use that to make any progress on Conjectures and Refutations. So these things have poor cost structure for what they provide. I like The Economist on my morning fifteen min BART for instance. And that's because that's dense. But if I have half an hour, that's…
on “Skim reading is the new normal. The effect on society is profound” ↗On the other hand, perhaps we could sit through half a book of refutation of refutation (cf. Conjectures and Refutations, literally the entire second half of the book), sometimes with not quite an impersonal tone.
on “Only positive reinforcement for researchers in some fields” ↗…they can distill "truths" into snapshots. Consequently, as a child I read about Galois Theory without reading Analyse d’un Mémoire sur la résolution algébrique des équations or a translation thereof. Conjectures and Refutations shows how to accelerate through a replay log, indexing at key-frames so that we don't need to play every frame to get to the conclusions we're searching for. Good field. Bad practice.
on “Daniel Dennett has died” ↗