earticle

영어

According to the modern world view, the characteristic of science is accepted as being more objective. Through this acceptance the modern world view has established the epistemological foundation known today. As a result the universal truth of validity were gained and reached through the scientific method.
Throughout the modern times, the principle of the scientific method was thought to be the method of induction. Observations and experiments generalized propositions, such as an assumption or a hypothesis, which is considered to be a scientific law. Because an observation and an experiment is to be objective, the results is to be pertained and objective, too. Therefore induction is considered as the very standard of judgment about truth.
Today, the character of disputations on philosophy of science is the attempt which overcomes the absolutism and the dogmatism of science and the scepticism on science. This tendency is represented by Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn, both of whom criticize a dogma of science. Their attempts have become the turning point through the history of the philosophy of science. We know the natural character of "science" through them.
Popper insists the falsificationism because of the inductive method's being contradictory, and he insists to represent the hypothesis which is possible to refute, and to examine the hypothesis, because it has a limit to accumulate the evidences just as the inductive method does. Hence he proclaims that this critical attitude is the most reasonable process. Popper's attitude, which is open and critical, comes to light by his view of the truth. Popper uses the terms 'corroboration' and 'conformation' instead of the general used terms 'true' and 'false' because these terms are not possible to refute. However the terms, 'corroboration' and 'confirmation' which Popper insists does not have the immutability. They are used in processing 'conjecture' and 'refutation' which mean that it is the truth by that time. So the conclusion which is gained by this method is only resonable through the scientific method of research. And this process is the inquiry for the truth which has 'regulative' meaning. The processing of research is the only course for absolute and immutable truth.
Thomas Kuhn insists that the truth through scientific research holds true only within the paradigm. Through the scientific revolution a paradigm can be changed, which means that the view of the world is changed too. According to Kuhn, the scientific revolution cannot be with the objectivity or the rationality, due that it is dependent upon the agreement between scientists.
Therefore the paradigm can not have the same standard even though it is in the same field of science. A paradigm can not be changed through the continuous and accumulative results of science, but only through a scientific revolution, Therefore a paradigm will be different from the former paradigm.
In conclusion, According to Popper and Kuhn, the truth through scientific method or scientific knowledge is not absolute and nor is it objective. It means the following: 1) The scientific discovery for the truth is not absolute. 2) The scientific discovery for the reality is not objective. 3) These facts show that science is open.
Finally, their inquiry make possible to open the science to field of fair criticism.

한국어

현대의 과학철학 논쟁의 특징은 근대에 팽배했던 과학의 절대주의, 독단주의 그리고 회의론을 극복하려는 새로운 시도의 등장에 있다. 그 대표자로 우리는 포퍼와 쿤을 들 수 있을 것이다.
포퍼는 근대의 과학적 방법으로 사용되던 귀납주의 대신 ‘반증주의’를 주장하는 것으로 시작한다. 그리고 포퍼의 비판적 태도는 귀납주의적 방법처럼 단순히 증거만을 축적하는 것이 아니라, 논박 가능한 가설을 주장하고, 그것에 대한 과감한 비판적 시험을 행하는 것이다. 그에게 이러한 비판적 태도는 가장 합리적 절차이며, 이를 통해 시행착오를 겪는 과정은 곧 진리에 다가가는 과정이 된다. 따라서 포퍼의 진리는 규제적 의미로 우리에게 주어진 것이다.
한편 쿤은 과학적 탐구를 통한 진리는 패러다임 내에서만 통용가능한 합리성과 진리임을 주장한다. 과학혁명을 통해서 패러다임이 바뀌게 되고, 이러한 패러다임의 변화는 세계를 바라보는 방식의 변화를 의미한다는 것이다.
포퍼와 쿤이 생각하는 진리는 절대성과 독단성을 띠지 않는다. 포퍼가 주장하는 규제적 의미로서의 진리는 열린 진리이다. 이것은 시간성을 포함하고 있는 진리이다. 한편 쿤에게 진리는 패러다임 내의 일종의 합의로부터 도출된다. 포퍼와 쿤의 과학관을 철학사적 맥락의 관점에서 살펴본다면, 이들의 사적 의의는 일치한다. 그것은 곧 진리에 대한 과학적 발견이 절대적이지 않음을 인정하는 것이다. 또한 실재에 대해 과학적 발견이 객관적일 수 없다는 이들의 입장은 과학이 가지는 본질적인 성격을 밝히고, 진리에 대한 재규정을 통해 과학의 대화참여 가능성을 보여준 것이다.