A Comparative Study On Popper's And Althusser's Views Of Science

Popper was a master of western scientific and philosophical thought in the twentieth century,establishing a unique and falsifiable view of science by challenging the orthodoxies of Anglo-American philosophy of science at the time.Althusser,a heavyweight of the same time in French philosophy,used a structuralist approach to provide a new scientific reading of Marx's thought.Although they belong to different research fields,they have a similar understanding of science.In today's era,when the barriers of disciplines are increasingly severe and the influences of true and false science coexist,comparing their views of science is helpful to understand science from a more holistic perspective.This paper will compare their views of science in the following sections.The first part is the introduction of theoretical backgrounds,with Popper finding the flaws of the scientism of the logical empiricists,and Althusser facing a flood of dogmatism and humanism in France.Despite the geopolitical differences between their views of science,they were both based on a concern for the contemporary problems of their respective times.The second part deals with the similarities and differences in their conceptual understanding of science,basing on both the origin and purpose of science,with Popper proposing a falsifiable science in the tension between problems and truth,and Althusser articulating a conceptually constructed science in the opposition and unity of ideology and science.The third part deals with a comparison of their views on the properties of science,with Popper ontologizing knowledge on the basis of a focus on the pattern of scientific development,thus presenting an evolutionary epistemology,and Althusser dividing Marx's pre-late thought within a problem-shifting framework,ultimately presenting a fractured epistemology.The fourth part is a comparison of the scientific methods they employed,with Popper arguing that science should be free from the shackles of dogma and subjectivity through constant trial and error,and Althusser arguing that scientific understanding of texts is not a blind intuitive reading but an attempt to uncover deeper connotations from neglected areas.The fifth part is a summary and evaluation of their views of science.Although both their views of science have a tendency to unify science and have a considerable degree of pioneering,they are still unable to avoid the dilemma of theoretical reflexivity,and on this basis this paper attempts to reflect on and discuss the current problems of scientific rationality.Finally,this paper illustrates the important practical significance of their view of science,arguing that their view of science can promote the integration of science and humanities on the basis of deepening the connotation of science and carrying forward the spirit of science,thus providing appropriate developmental ideas for future research on the value of science.