KARL POPPER ON TWO KINDS OF RATIONALISM
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52567/pjsr.v5i01.1368Abstract
‘Rational’ and ‘Irrational’ are two words in the philosophical diction which have been very confounding and controversial. For many philosophers, the philosophy of Plato is not only a great example of Idealism but also of rational thought. But for many philosophers it is not according to rational standards or even to standards of common sense. Kierkegaard is supposed to be the father and founder of Existentialism and his dissatisfaction towards reason, rationality and logic is quite obvious. Many great philosophers and thinkers like Schopenhauer, Bergeson, Nietzsche and Freud (the founder of Psycho Analysis) raised many serious questions about the validity of rational arguments and the importance of reason in the complete personality of a human being. The views of Karl R. Popper in this regard are very interesting. He is the strong upholder of Rationalism in Philosophy and Science but he does admit the limitations of a rational thought. This article is an attempt to understand the concept of a valid rational argument according to Karl R. Popper.
Key Words: Rational, Irrational, A rational, Critical Rationalism, Uncritical or Comprehensive Rationalism.
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Muhammad Jawwad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
