इम्रे लक़तोस
वैज्ञानिक प्रति-उदाहरणों के बावजूद किसी सिद्धांत को उचित रूप से तब तक रखते हैं जब तक उसका अनुसंधान-कार्यक्रम नए तथ्यों की भविष्यवाणी करता रहे; उसे तब छोड़ा जाता है जब वह केवल बहाने बनाता है।
पृष्ठभूमि
LSE के हंगेरियाई-ब्रिटिश गणित और विज्ञान के दार्शनिक: सिद्धांत एक-एक करके खंडित नहीं होते; पूरे अनुसंधान-कार्यक्रम प्रतिस्पर्धा करते हैं और इस पर परखे जाते हैं कि वे नए तथ्यों की भविष्यवाणी करते हैं (प्रगतिशील) या केवल विसंगतियों पर पैबंद लगाते हैं (अवनतिशील)।
मुख्य विचार
- अनुसंधान-कार्यक्रम (कठोर कोर और सहायक परिकल्पनाएँ)
- प्रगतिशील बनाम अवनतिशील
- प्रमाण और खंडन
प्रभाव
जिनसे प्रभावित 1
गेऑर्ग विल्हेल्म फ़्रीडरिश हेगल
जिनसे प्रभावित
Lakatos named Hegel’s dialectic, beside Popper and Pólya, among the sources of his account of mathematics as growing through proofs and counterexamples (‘Proofs and Refutations’, 1963–64). I. Lakatos, “Proofs and Refutations”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 14 (1963–64); Proofs and Refutations (ed. J. Worrall and E. Zahar, 1976); SEP “Imre Lakatos”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
गेऑर्ग विल्हेल्म फ़्रीडरिश हेगल › 1770–1831
आलोचना
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित 1
पॉल फेएराबेंड जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Feyerabend dedicated Against Method (1975) to Lakatos, ‘friend and fellow-anarchist’, as his half of a planned joint debate book, For and Against Method (publ. 1999). P. K. Feyerabend, Against Method (1975); I. Lakatos and P. K. Feyerabend, For and Against Method (ed. M. Motterlini, 1999); SEP “Paul Feyerabend”
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Feyerabend argued that Lakatos’s methodology of research programmes is ‘anarchism in disguise’, since it gives no rule for when a degenerating programme must be abandoned (Against Method, 1975). P. Feyerabend, Against Method (1975), ch. 16 (the book is dedicated to Lakatos); I. Lakatos & P. Feyerabend, For and Against Method (1999)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
पॉल फेएराबेंड › 1924–1994
जिनकी आलोचना की 2
कार्ल पॉपर जिनसे प्रभावित
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Lakatos, Popper’s colleague at the LSE from 1960, applied his critical rationalism to mathematics, whose growth he traced through proofs and counterexamples (‘Proofs and Refutations’, 1963–64). I. Lakatos, “Proofs and Refutations”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 14 (1963–64); SEP “Imre Lakatos”
जिनकी आलोचना की
Against Popper’s naive falsificationism, Lakatos argued that single refutations decide nothing; research programmes are judged as progressive or degenerating (‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, 1970). I. Lakatos, “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes” (1970); “Popper on Demarcation and Induction”, in P. A. Schilpp (ed.), The Philosophy of Karl Popper (1974)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कार्ल पॉपर › 1902–1994
थॉमस एस. कुहन
जिनकी आलोचना की
Lakatos objected that Kuhn makes theory change a matter of ‘mob psychology’ and proposed rationally reconstructed research programmes instead (‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, 1970). I. Lakatos, “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes”, in I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (1970), 91–196
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
थॉमस एस. कुहन › 1922–1996
कृतियाँ
पॉपर और कुहन के बीच: कठोर कोर और सहायक परिकल्पनाओं वाले अनुसंधान-कार्यक्रम, जिन्हें प्रगतिशील या अवनतिशील के रूप में परखा जाता है।
- 1976प्रमाण और खंडन
बहुफलकों के लिए यूलर के सूत्र पर एक कक्षा-संवाद: गणित अनुमानों, प्रति-उदाहरणों और बेहतर अवधारणाओं से बढ़ता है (लेख 1963–64, पुस्तक 1976)।
मत
Proofs and Refutations, based on his thesis and published as articles in 1963–64, is a classroom dialogue about Euler’s formula for polyhedra. Each proof meets counterexamples; the class responds by barring “monsters”, adjusting the claim or improving the concepts. Mathematics, Lakatos argued, is not a growing heap of certainties but develops through conjectures and refutations, an idea he took from Popper and from George Pólya, with a debt to Hegel’s dialectic. In the philosophy of science he tried to steer between Popper and Kuhn. Against “naive” falsificationism he observed that scientists rightly keep theories in spite of anomalies; against Kuhn he insisted that theory change can be rational and is not a matter of “mob psychology”. His unit of appraisal is the research programme: a “hard core” of assumptions protected by a belt of auxiliary hypotheses. A programme is progressive if its adjustments lead to the prediction of novel facts that are then confirmed, and degenerating if it only explains anomalies after the event. His friend Paul Feyerabend, who dedicated Against Method to him, replied that the methodology gives no rule for when to abandon a programme; their planned joint book appeared as For and Against Method in 1999.
जीवन और संदर्भ
Imre Lakatos was born Imre Lipsitz in Debrecen in 1922 into a Jewish family. During the war he joined a communist resistance group and changed his name, first to Molnár and later to Lakatos; his mother and grandmother were murdered in Auschwitz. In 1944, according to later accounts, he persuaded the group that its youngest member, Éva Izsák, should take her own life to avoid betraying them, and she died. After 1945 he worked in the Ministry of Education as a committed Stalinist until he was arrested in 1950 and imprisoned for three years. He fled Hungary after the uprising of 1956, took his doctorate at Cambridge under R. B. Braithwaite in 1961 and from 1960 taught at the London School of Economics. He died in London in 1974, aged 51.
अन्य प्रमुख कृतियाँ
- Proofs and Refutations (articles 1963–64, book 1976)
- Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes (1970)
- History of Science and Its Rational Reconstructions (1971)
- The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes (Philosophical Papers I, 1978)
नवंबर 2026 तक · स्रोत · इस पृष्ठ को बेहतर बनाएँ · Agora कैसे बना है