Popperlike

Popperlike is an adjective used to describe ideas, theories, methods, or arguments that resemble the approach associated with the philosopher Karl Popper. In this sense, popperlike thinking emphasizes critical testing, openness to refutation, and the view that knowledge advances through conjectures that are subjected to falsification rather than through attempts at ultimate verification.

Etymology and usage context: The term is formed by combining Popper’s name with the suffix -like and appears in scholarly discussions to indicate varying degrees of alignment with Popperian ideas such as falsifiability, problem-driven inquiry, and the iterative cycle of conjecture and refutation. It is often employed in sociology of science, philosophy of science, and related fields to describe practices that echo Popper’s methodology without claiming full doctrinal adherence.

Typical features: A popperlike approach prioritizes making falsifiable predictions, designing experiments or analyses that could potentially refute a claim, and treating scientific knowledge as provisional. It often involves explicit criteria for testing hypotheses and a willingness to discard or revise theories in light of contrary evidence.

Limitations and debates: The label is informal and can be used loosely to signal similarity rather than rigorous adherence to Popper’s exact framework. Critics note that real-world science frequently combines falsification with other evaluative criteria, so calling something popperlike may overstate methodological purity.

See also: Karl Popper, falsifiability, falsificationism, demarcation problem, scientific method.