Review Of "The Philosophy Of Karl Popper" By H. Keuth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Popper was arguably the most influential philosopher of science in the 20th century. Keuth (Eberhard Karls Univ., Tübingen) provides a systematic exposition and critical study (first published in German in 2000) that covers all major aspects of Popper's work. Nearly half of this comprehensive book is devoted to Popper's philosophy of science; a quarter to his social philosophy; and the final quarter to his metaphysics, especially his grappling with the mind-body problem, determinism versus indeterminism, and the third world of objective thought. Each major part of the book is lucidly presented, with critical arguments interspersed. Although each major part can be read independently, Keuth shows how the latter two grow out of Popper's philosophy of science. There is, however, little discussion of how Popper came to his ideas; for that, see Malachi Haim Hacohen's Karl Popper--The Formative Years, 1902-1945 (CH, Apr'01, 38-4399), which complements Keuth's book wonderfully. Summing Up: Highly recommended. Upper-level undergraduates and above.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".