\n“The Gods did not reveal, from the beginning,
\nAll things to us; but in the course of time,
\nThrough seeking, men find that which is the better.
\nBut as for certain truth, no man has known it,
\nNor will he know it; neither of the gods,
\nNor yet of all the things of which I speak.
\nAnd even if by chance he were to utter
\nThe final truth, he would himself not know it;
\nFor all is but a woven web of guesses.”<\/font><\/font><\/p><\/blockquote>\nSome in KM seem to confuse fallibilism with na\u00efve falsificationism, a position sometimes incorrectly attributed to Popper, which asserts that statements can be conclusively disproved, but not conclusively proved. Apart from his fallibilism, which he shares with Peirce and American Pragmatist philosophers generally, however, Popper advocated a version of falsificationism which stated that universal generalizations or laws can be \u201crefuted\u201d or \u201cfalsified\u201d by a single disconfirming instance, but cannot be verified by any number of instances consistent with the generalization. This is sometimes referred to as the asymmetry of verification and falsification. In presenting this view, Popper is careful to make clear that \u201cthe facts\u201d do not themselves falsify or refute generalizations, or verify singular statements for that matter. He says that it is we who do that through our decisions. The most that facts and logic can tell us is whether or not our network of knowledge claims has a problem of inconsistency, and that to solve this problem we will have to decide that one or more knowledge claims in our network is false. Such a decision, not logical proof or disproof, is at the end of the falsification process.<\/font><\/font><\/p>\nTo Be Continued<\/font><\/font><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Since Karl Popper’s views on objective knowledge and scientific \u201clogic\u201d seem to be gaining a little traction in KM these days, I think it may be a good idea to offer a clear statement about his views on fallibilism and falsificationism, especially since I agree with them. Fallibilism is the idea that no knowledge claim, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,3,8],"tags":[179,916,19,45,3531,917,918],"class_list":["post-119","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-epistemologyontology","category-knowledge-making","category-knowledge-management","tag-fallibilism","tag-falsificationism","tag-karl-popper","tag-km","tag-knowledge-management","tag-naive-falsificationism","tag-xenophanes"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kmci.org\/alllifeisproblemsolving\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kmci.org\/alllifeisproblemsolving\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kmci.org\/alllifeisproblemsolving\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kmci.org\/alllifeisproblemsolving\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kmci.org\/alllifeisproblemsolving\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=119"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/kmci.org\/alllifeisproblemsolving\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kmci.org\/alllifeisproblemsolving\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=119"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kmci.org\/alllifeisproblemsolving\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=119"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kmci.org\/alllifeisproblemsolving\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=119"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"marbl\"](\"http:\/\/www.dkms.com\/kmci\/alllifeisproblemsolving\/wp-content\/themes\/cutline-3-column-split-11\/images\/marbl001.jpg\")
<\/p>\n