MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396646901 · doi:10.63003/um.v1i1.22

Teori Falsifikasi Karl Popper

2024· article· en· W4396646901 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Ungu Madahi · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDecision Support System Applications
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Why is truth always debated? Why should there be right and wrong? Why must there be black when white is so much more pleasant? Everyone has their own definition of truth. But is what is thought and meant by truth really the truth? Who determines the truth? What is the real meaning of truth? It goes back to each person or individual. What is the purpose of seeking the truth? This question could have the same element, why are humans not just happy, why do humans also have to experience sadness? Humans cannot recognise happiness if there is no sadness. Moreover, a truth that is held by Christians is Scripture, as the absolute. Religion also often feels that it is perfect, that it is the element of the world. However, all these perspectives need to be "wait and see", they need to be doubted, as Popper put it. This paper will look at Popper's critical understanding of epistemology. Then it will look at religion from Popper's perspective. He is a person who criticises the logic of knowledge. Even for him, criticism is used as a method to find a truth. Mengapa kebenaran selalu diperdebatkan? Mengapa harus ada yang benar dan ada yang salah? Mengapa harus ada hitam bila putih jauh lebih menyenangkan? Setiap orang memiliki definisinya sendiri tentang kebenaran. Tetapi apakah yang dipikirkan dan dimaksudkan dengan kebenaran itu adalah sungguh sebuah kebenaran? Siapa penentu kebenaran? Apa makna kebenaran sesungguhnya? Kembali lagi kepada personal atau individu masing-masing. Untuk apa dicari sebuah kebenaran? Pertanyaan ini bisa saja memiliki unsur yang sama, mengapa manusia tidak bahagia saja, mengapa manusia juga harus mengalami kesedihan? Manusia tidak bisa mengenal yang namanya kebahagiaan jika tidak ada kesedihan. Terlebih lagi suatu kebenaran yang dipegang oleh Kristen adalah Kitab Suci, sebagai yang absolut. Agama juga seringkali merasa dirinya sempurna, merasa dirinya adalah unsur dunia. Akan tetapi, semua perspektif ini harus “tunggu dulu”, perlu diragukan dulu segala sesuatunya, demikian Popper katakan. Tulisan ini mau melihat pemahaman seorang Popper yang kritis terhadap epistemologi. Kemudian akan melihat agama dari kacamata Popper. Ia adalah orang yang memberi kritik terhadap logika pengetahuan. Bahkan baginya kritik digunakan menjadi metode untuk menemukan sebuah kebenaran.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.040

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it