![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/cc-turkiye\/z-2013-Images-2\/122.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Hasan Engin \u015eener G\u0130R\u0130\u015e<\/p>\n <\/b>Bilim nedir? Bilim olanla olmayan aras\u0131nda bir s\u0131n\u0131r var m\u0131d\u0131r? E\u011fer bir s\u0131n\u0131r varsa, bilimsel olmayan \u00f6nermeler anlams\u0131z m\u0131d\u0131r? Bilim nesnel midir? Nesnellik varsa, nas\u0131l sa\u011flanmaktad\u0131r? Bilimsel bilgi bir geli\u015fim i\u00e7inde midir? E\u011fer \u00f6yleyse, bilimsel bilgi nas\u0131l ilerlemektedir? Ele\u015ftirinin bilimsel kuramlar a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00f6nem nedir? Bilimsel kuramlar aras\u0131nda bir tercih (ye\u011fleme) s\u00f6z konusu olabilir mi? Bilimsel bir kuram nas\u0131l olu\u015fturulur?<\/span><\/p>\n Bunlar ve akla gelebilecek di\u011fer sorular ve bunlara verilecek cevaplar, bilimsel bilginin niteli\u011finin ortaya konmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131nda \u00e7ok b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131maktad\u0131r. Makale, bu sorulara Karl Popper\u2019in bilim felsefesi ba\u011flam\u0131nda yan\u0131t arayacakt\u0131r. <\/span><\/p>\n \u0130lk ana b\u00f6l\u00fcmde Popper\u2019in ele\u015ftirel tutuma verdi\u011fi \u00f6nem a\u00e7\u0131klanmaktad\u0131r. \u0130kinci ana b\u00f6l\u00fcmde, Popper\u2019in do\u011frulamac\u0131l\u0131k ele\u015ftirisi yer almaktad\u0131r. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ana b\u00f6l\u00fcm ve sonu\u00e7 ise yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n tamamen ortaya kondu\u011fu b\u00f6l\u00fcm olacakt\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n Bu ba\u011flamda denilebilir ki, makale, pozitivist bilim felsefesinin iki \u00f6nemli anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7ermektedir: Do\u011frulamac\u0131l\u0131k ve yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131k.[1]<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n I. POPPER\u2019DE ELE\u015eT\u0130REL TUTUM<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Makale, Popper\u2019in bilim felsefesini ele\u015ftirel tutumu ba\u011flam\u0131nda, merkezi noktaya ele\u015ftirelli\u011fi koyarak a\u00e7\u0131klamaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015facakt\u0131r, zira G\u00fczel\u2019in de belirtti\u011fi gibi (1996:7) \u201cele\u015ftirel olmak, ba\u015fka bir de\u011fi\u015fle ussal olmak Popper\u2019in felsefesinin temelidir.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Karl Popper\u2019e (1965: 15) g\u00f6re asl\u0131nda \u201cfelsefeye \u00f6zg\u00fc hi\u00e7bir y\u00f6ntem yoktur\u201d. Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re d\u00fcnyay\u0131 anlamak i\u00e7in bir\u00e7ok y\u00f6ntem vard\u0131r; ancak, bu demek de\u011fildir ki Popper\u2019in di\u011fer y\u00f6ntemlerden daha \u00e7ok de\u011fer verdi\u011fi bir y\u00f6ntem yoktur. Popper (1965: 16), mevcut probleme g\u00f6re de\u011fi\u015febilen bu y\u00f6ntemler aras\u0131nda \u201cbir y\u00f6ntemin bahsedilmeye de\u011fer oldu\u011funu\u201d belirtir ki bu da kendi felsefesinin temelini olu\u015fturan ele\u015ftirel y\u00f6ntemdir.<\/span><\/p>\n A. ELE\u015eT\u0130REL Y\u00d6TEME G\u0130R\u0130\u015e<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Popper\u2019in yaz\u0131lar\u0131nda ele\u015ftirel y\u00f6ntemi \u00f6ven bir\u00e7ok ifade bulunmaktad\u0131r. Popper\u2019in bilim felsefesini a\u00e7\u0131klamak ba\u011flam\u0131nda yard\u0131mc\u0131 olacak bu noktalara makalenin sistemati\u011fi i\u00e7inde de\u011finilecektir. Popper, bilim-\u00f6ncesi d\u00fczey ve bilimsel d\u00fczey ayr\u0131m\u0131na gider. \u201cBilim-\u00f6ncesi d\u00fczeyde, yan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olabilece\u011fimiz d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi pek ho\u015fumuza gitmez. (\u2026) Bilimsel d\u00fczeyde ise d\u00fczenli olarak yanl\u0131\u015flar\u0131m\u0131z\u0131 hatalar\u0131m\u0131z\u0131 arar\u0131z\u201d (Magee, 1996:24). Bilim-\u00f6cesi d\u00fczeyde istenmeyen yan\u0131lg\u0131lar\u0131m\u0131z sorunlara yol a\u00e7arken, bilimsel d\u00fczeyde bu yan\u0131lg\u0131lar\u0131 bizatihi kendimiz istemekteyiz. \u0130\u015fte az \u00f6nce bahsedilen \u201camip ile Einstein\u201d aras\u0131ndaki fark da tam olarak burada a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011fa kavu\u015fturulmaktad\u0131r. Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re (1996a:193);<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cdeneme-yan\u0131lma y\u00f6ntemi elbette bilimsel veya ele\u015ftirel yakla\u015f\u0131mla -kestirim ve \u00e7\u00fcr\u00fctme y\u00f6ntemiyle- d\u00fcped\u00fcz \u00f6zde\u015f de\u011fildir. Deneme-yan\u0131lma y\u00f6ntemi yaln\u0131z Einstein taraf\u0131ndan de\u011fil, daha inak\u00e7\u0131 bi\u00e7imde amip taraf\u0131ndan da uygulan\u0131r. Aradaki fark, denemelerden \u00e7ok yan\u0131lmalar kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda g\u00f6sterilen ele\u015ftirel ve yap\u0131c\u0131 tutumda yatar\u201d (italikler benim). <\/span><\/p>\n \u0130\u015fte, bilimsel d\u00fczeyde d\u00fczenli olarak yanl\u0131\u015f kuram arama ve yanl\u0131\u015f kuramlar\u0131 d\u0131\u015far\u0131da b\u0131rakma bir y\u00f6ntem olarak geli\u015fir ve kullan\u0131l\u0131r. Bu y\u00f6nteme \u201cele\u015ftirel yanl\u0131\u015f\u0131 d\u0131\u015farda b\u0131rakma y\u00f6ntemi\u201d denir (Magee, 1996: 24). D\u0131\u015farda b\u0131rakma y\u00f6ntemi, Popper\u2019in bilim felsefesinin bir anlat\u0131m\u0131 olan \u201cyanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u201d temelini olu\u015fturur ve bilim felsefesiyle ele\u015ftirinin Popper\u2019de nas\u0131l i\u00e7 i\u00e7e ge\u00e7mi\u015f oldu\u011funun \u00f6nemli bir g\u00f6stergesi olarak kar\u015f\u0131m\u0131za \u00e7\u0131kar. <\/span><\/p>\n Bu ba\u011flamda Popper\u2019de ele\u015ftirinin \u00f6nemini anlamak i\u00e7in a\u00e7\u0131klama gereksinimi duyduyum en \u00f6nemli konulardan birisi de \u201cPopper\u2019in \u00dc\u00e7 D\u00fcnya Kuram\u0131\u201dd\u0131r. Bu kurama ge\u00e7meden \u00f6nce ele\u015ftirinin ve tart\u0131\u015fman\u0131n Popper\u2019deki \u00f6nemini daha da per\u00e7inlemek amac\u0131yla Eski Yunan filozoflar\u0131na uzanaca\u011f\u0131z.<\/span><\/p>\n B. GELENE\u011e\u0130N USSAL KURAMINA DO\u011eRU:<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n \u201cTowards A Rational Theory Of Tradition\u201d (1963a) adl\u0131 makalesinde Popper ussal gelenekten bahseder ve bu gelene\u011fin adresini Eski Yunan olarak g\u00f6sterir. Bunun nedeninin \u201cYunan filozoflar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fada ne oldu\u011funu anlamaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan ilk filozoflar oldu\u011fu\u201d yollu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceyi tatminkar bulmaz. O\u2019na g\u00f6re Eski Yunan filozoflar\u0131 ger\u00e7ekten de do\u011fada ne oldu\u011funu anlamaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131lar; fakat onlardan \u00f6nceki ilkel s\u00f6ylen-yap\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131 (myth-makers) da ayn\u0131 \u015feyi yapt\u0131lar. Bilim-\u00f6ncesi s\u00f6ylen yap\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131, bir f\u0131rt\u0131na yakla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u201cOh evet, Zeus k\u0131zg\u0131n.\u201d dediler, deniz dalgal\u0131 oldu\u011funda da \u201cPoseidon k\u0131zg\u0131n.\u201d dediler. Bu, Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re ussal gelenekten \u00f6nce bulunmu\u015f olan tatminkar a\u00e7\u0131klama bi\u00e7imleriydi. Bu noktada Popper ger\u00e7ekte belirgin olan farkl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n ne oldu\u011funu sorar. Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re s\u00f6ylenebilecek belki tek farkl\u0131l\u0131k bilim-\u00f6ncesi yap\u0131lan a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n daha kolay olu\u015fuydu; \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc, Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re, deniz dalgal\u0131 oldu\u011funda getirilen Poseidon\u2019un k\u0131zg\u0131n oldu\u011funa dair a\u00e7\u0131klama, bunun hava ile su aras\u0131ndaki s\u00fcrt\u00fcnmeden kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yleyen a\u00e7\u0131klamadan daha kolay anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131rd\u0131r (Popper, 1963a:126).<\/span><\/p>\n O zaman Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re as\u0131l farkl\u0131l\u0131k neydi? Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re as\u0131l yenilik, onlar\u0131n tart\u0131\u015fmaya ba\u015flamas\u0131d\u0131r: \u201cDinsel gelene\u011fi ele\u015ftirmeden ve de\u011fi\u015ftirilemez olarak kabul etmek yerine, onunla m\u00fccadele ettiler ve hatta bazen eskisinin yerine yeni bir s\u00f6ylen icat ettiler\u201d (1963a:126). K\u0131sacas\u0131, Eski Yunan filozoflar\u0131 yeni bir gelenek icat ettiler: Bu, s\u00f6ylenlere kar\u015f\u0131 ele\u015ftirel bir tutum benimsemenin, onlarla tart\u0131\u015fman\u0131n gelene\u011fiydi. Bu s\u00f6ylenlerin bizzat onu yaratanlar taraf\u0131ndan ele\u015ftirilebildi\u011fi bir gelenekti bu Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re.<\/span><\/p>\n Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re bilim dedi\u011fimiz \u015fey, \u00f6nceki s\u00f6ylenlerden kesin oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in de\u011fil, ikinci-d\u00fczen bir gelene\u011fin beraberinde geldi\u011fi i\u00e7in farkl\u0131d\u0131r: \u201cBu ikinci d\u00fczen gelenek (second-order tradition) ele\u015ftirel ve tart\u0131\u015fmac\u0131 tutumdur\u201d (Popper, 1963a:127).<\/span><\/p>\n C. POPPER\u2019\u0130N \u00dc\u00c7 D\u00dcNYA KURAMI<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Ele\u015ftirel tutum ile ilgili son durak noktas\u0131 kan\u0131mca Popper\u2019i anlatabilmek ve anlayabilmek i\u00e7in gerekli olan ara\u00e7lardan birisi olan Popper\u2019in \u00dc\u00e7 D\u00fcnya Kuram\u0131\u2019d\u0131r.<\/p>\n Say\u0131n Irz\u0131k\u2019\u0131n (1990:84) da belirtti\u011fi gibi Popper bilimsel bilginin niteli\u011fini ortaya koymak amac\u0131yla \u201c\u00fc\u00e7 d\u00fcnya kuram\u0131\u201d diyebilece\u011fimiz bir g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f geli\u015ftirir.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201c\u00dc\u00e7 d\u00fcnya kuram\u0131, nesnel anlamda bilgi ya da d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce ile \u00f6znel anlamda bilgi ya da d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce aras\u0131ndaki ayr\u0131ma dayan\u0131r. \u00d6znel anlamda bilgi ya da d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce bir zihin hali ya da davran\u0131\u015f e\u011filimidir; nesnel anlamda bilgi ya da d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce ise problemlerden, kuramlardan ve arg\u00fcmanlardan olu\u015fur \u201c(Irz\u0131k, 1990:84).<\/span><\/p>\n Popper fizik nesnelerin birinci d\u00fcnyaya, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncelerimizin ikinci d\u00fcnyaya ait oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yler. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc d\u00fcnya ise, kamusal alana \u00e7\u0131kan d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncelerimizin somut yans\u0131malar\u0131ndan (\u00f6rne\u011fin kitaplar, makaleler, k\u00fct\u00fcphaneler vs.) olu\u015fur ki bunlar art\u0131k ele\u015ftiriye a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r ve bu nedenle de nesneldir. Zaten Popper nesnel bir kuram derken a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ele\u015ftiriye a\u00e7\u0131k olan bir kuram\u0131 kastetti\u011fini belirtir: \u201cNesnel bir kuram derken, tart\u0131\u015f\u0131labilen, rasyonel ele\u015ftiriye tabi tutulabilen, tercihan s\u0131nanabilen bir kuram\u0131 kastediyorum.\u201d (aktaran Irz\u0131k, 1990:89) der Popper.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cBir ba\u015fka deyi\u015fle, kuram ve hipotezlerimizi ortaya atar\u0131z. B\u00f6ylece onlar\u0131 herkesin anlay\u0131p ele\u015ftirme imkan\u0131 do\u011far. Gerekli donan\u0131ma sahip herkez ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerin mant\u0131ksal a\u00e7\u0131dan tutarl\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ampirik a\u00e7\u0131dan ise g\u00f6zlem ve deney sonu\u00e7lar\u0131yla uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 sorgulayabilir, onlar\u0131 ele\u015ftirebilir. Bilimsel bilginin nesnelli\u011fi, ilke olarak herkesin b\u00f6yle bir u\u011fra\u015f\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fctebilecek olmas\u0131ndan, ele\u015ftirilebilir olmas\u0131ndan kaynaklan\u0131r. Bilginin y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclebilecek olmas\u0131ndan kaynaklan\u0131r. Bilginin nesnel olmas\u0131 bireylerin t\u00fcm\u00fcnden birden ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olmas\u0131 de\u011fil, tek tek bireylerden ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olmas\u0131 demektir. Bilginin kamusal niteli\u011fini anlam\u0131 budur\u201d (Irz\u0131k, 1990:89).<\/span><\/p>\n Popper (1996e) bu ba\u011flamda \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc d\u00fcnyan\u0131n \u00f6zerkli\u011fi tezini ortaya atar ve bunu \u015fu uslamlama i\u015fle a\u00e7\u0131klar: 1. Deney: Bu noktada Popper, bizden b\u00fct\u00fcn makinelerimizin, aletlerimizin, \u00f6znel bilgilerimizin vs. yok oldu\u011funu ama k\u00fct\u00fcphaneler ile bunlardan \u00f6\u011frenme yetene\u011fimizin ayakta kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmemizi ister. \u201cBu durumda, belli ki, hayli zahmet \u00e7ektikten sonra d\u00fcnya yine ray\u0131n oturacakt\u0131r.\u201d (Popper, 1996e:117) der. 2. Deneyde; bu sefer b\u00fct\u00fcn k\u00fct\u00fcphaneler de yokolmu\u015ftur, b\u00f6ylelikle de kitaplardan bir \u015feyler \u00f6\u011frenme yetene\u011fimiz i\u015fe yaramaz bir hale gelmi\u015ftir. Buradan \u015fu sonuca var\u0131r: \u201cBu iki deney \u00fczerine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcrseniz, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc d\u00fcnyan\u0131n ger\u00e7ekli\u011fi, anlam\u0131, \u00f6zerklik dercesi (hem ikinci hem de birinci d\u00fcnya \u00fczerine etkileri kadar) zihnimizde daha a\u00e7\u0131k olarak belirecektir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc ikinci durumda uygarl\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z binlerce y\u0131l yeniden ortaya \u00e7\u0131kamayacakt\u0131r\u201d (Popper, 1996e:117).<\/span><\/p>\n Burada Popper, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc d\u00fcnyan\u0131n bireyden, bilen \u00f6zeneden ayr\u0131 olarak (yar\u0131) \u00f6zerk oldu\u011funu ortaya koymaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131r. Popper \u015f\u00f6yle der: \u201c\u00d6zerklik d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi benim \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc d\u00fcnya kuram\u0131m\u0131n merkezidir: \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc d\u00fcnya bir insan \u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fc, bir insan yarat\u0131s\u0131 olmakla birlikte (\u2026) kendi \u00f6zerk alan\u0131n\u0131 yarat\u0131r\u201d (Popper, 1996e:128).<\/p>\n Popper \u00f6zerkli\u011fin bir ba\u015fka anlat\u0131m\u0131 olarak matematikten verdi\u011fi bir \u00f6rnek ile \u201cistenmedik yeni olgulara, beklenmedik yeni sorunlara, ayr\u0131ca \u00e7o\u011fu kez yeni \u00e7\u00fcr\u00fctmelere\u201d (1996e:128) neden olma durumunu betimler:<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cDo\u011fal say\u0131lar dizisinin insan yap\u0131s\u0131 oldu\u011fu konusunda Brouwer\u2019le ayn\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncedeyim. Ama bu diziyi biz yaratsak da dizi kendi \u00f6zerk sorunlar\u0131n\u0131 yarat\u0131r. Tekle \u00e7ift say\u0131lar aras\u0131ndaki ayr\u0131m\u0131 biz yaratmad\u0131k: Bizim yarat\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n hem istenmedik hem de zorunlu bir sonucudur\u201d [2]<\/i> (Popper, 1996e:128).<\/span><\/p>\n Bu istenmedik ve zorunlu sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi Popper\u2019i bilginin geli\u015fimi fikrine g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcr: \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc d\u00fcnya birinci d\u00fcnyay\u0131 etkileyerek geri-besleyecek ve bilgi zorunlu olarak artacakt\u0131r. <\/span><\/p>\n Birinci k\u0131s\u0131mda Popper\u2019in bilim felsefesi anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ele\u015ftirel tutumun \u00f6nemi a\u00e7\u0131klanmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131k i\u00e7in bir temel olu\u015ftululmak istenmi\u015ftir. Bu k\u0131s\u0131mda yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n neye tepki ve hangi soruna yan\u0131t oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131klanmak suretiyle, yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131\u011fa ad\u0131m ad\u0131m ula\u015f\u0131lacakt\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n A. V\u0130YANA \u00c7EVRES\u0130 VE DO\u011eRULAMACILIK<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Mant\u0131ksal olgucular ya da Yeni Olgucular olarak da adland\u0131r\u0131lan Viyana \u00c7evresi\u2019nin ba\u015fl\u0131ca temsilcileri; Moritz Schlick, Rudolf Carnap ve Otto Neurath\u2019t\u0131r. <\/span><\/p>\n Viyana \u00c7evresi\u2019nin en temel \u00f6\u011fretisi do\u011frulamac\u0131l\u0131kt\u0131: \u201cHer\u015fey do\u011frulanabilirlik ilkesi denilen ve Schlick taraf\u0131ndan \u2018bir \u00f6nermenin anlam\u0131 onun do\u011frulama y\u00f6ntemidir.\u2019 diye \u00f6zl\u00fc bir bi\u00e7imde dile getirilen, ilkeye ba\u011fl\u0131y\u0131d\u0131\u201d (Magee, 1979:175). Ayer -mant\u0131ksal olguculu\u011fu Language, Truth and Logic (Dil, Do\u011fruluk ve Mant\u0131k) adl\u0131 eseriyle \u0130ngiltere\u2019ye getiren ki\u015fidir- bunun iki anlam\u0131 oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yler: \u201cBrincisi, deney ve g\u00f6zlemle -duyusal g\u00f6zlemle- do\u011frulanamayan her\u015feyin anlams\u0131z olmas\u0131yd\u0131. (\u2026) \u0130kincisi ise, \u00f6nceleri Schlick\u2019in yorumlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bi\u00e7imde, bir \u00f6nermenin anlam\u0131 onu neyin do\u011frulayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yleyerek betimlenebilir olmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiriyordu\u201d (Magee, 1979:176).<\/span><\/p>\n G\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc gibi Mant\u0131k\u00e7\u0131 Pozitivizm\u2019in temel sorunu \u201camlams\u0131zl\u0131k\u201dt\u0131r. Onlara g\u00f6re metafizik olan, g\u00f6zlemle do\u011frulanamayan her\u015fey anlams\u0131zd\u0131r. Carnap anlams\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131 iki s\u0131n\u0131fa ay\u0131r\u0131r. Birincisi \u201cs\u00f6zdizimi (sentaks) bak\u0131m\u0131ndan do\u011fru kurulmu\u015f \u00f6nermelerde anlams\u0131z s\u00f6zc\u00fckler yer al\u0131r -bununla \u015fu da \u00f6ne s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f olur: bu gibi s\u00f6zc\u00fckleri i\u00e7inde blulunduran t\u00fcm t\u00fcmceler i\u00e7in de do\u011frulama ko\u015fullar\u0131 verilmemi\u015ftir\u201d (Akarasu, 1979:160). Bu anlams\u0131z s\u00f6zc\u00fcklere \u00f6rnek olarak, \u201cmutlak\u201d, \u201cko\u015fulsuz olan\u201d, \u201cger\u00e7ekten varolan\u201d, \u201chi\u00e7lik\u201d, \u201cevrentemelli\u201d vb. s\u00f6zc\u00fckleri verir. \u201cAnlams\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n ikinci s\u0131n\u0131f\u0131 \u015furada bulunur: Anlaml\u0131 deyimler s\u00f6zdizimi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan bozuk bir bi\u00e7imde biraraya getirlirler. Bu \u00e7e\u015fitten anlams\u0131zl\u0131\u011fa \u00f6rnek \u2018Sezar bir say\u0131d\u0131r.\u2019, \u2018k\u0131r\u00e7i\u00e7e\u011fi bir hayvand\u0131r\u2019\u201d (Akarsu, 1979:161).<\/span><\/p>\n Metafizik \u00f6nermeler daha \u00e7ok Carnap\u2019\u0131n ay\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 anlams\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n birinci s\u0131n\u0131f\u0131n\u0131na dahildir. Carnap\u2019a g\u00f6re metafizik sorunlar g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc-sorunlard\u0131r. Ba\u015fka bir ifadeyle sorun dahi de\u011fillerdir, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc bunlar anlams\u0131zd\u0131r. \u00d6rne\u011fin biri ger\u00e7ek\u00e7i (realist) \u00f6teki idealist ya da tekbenci (solipist) iki co\u011frafyac\u0131 oldu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnelim. Her ikisi de Brezilya\u2019n\u0131n ortas\u0131nda belli bir g\u00f6l\u00fcn olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131racaklar. O b\u00f6lgeye yap\u0131lan bilimsel bir gezi ve empirik ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar sonucu g\u00f6l\u00fcn mevcut oldu\u011funu ve g\u00f6l\u00fcn co\u011frafi durumunu, derinli\u011fi, y\u00fcz\u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcm\u00fc vb. \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcmleri al\u0131yorlar. Bu iki ara\u015ft\u0131rmac\u0131n\u0131n bu \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcmlerde bir kar\u015f\u0131tl\u0131\u011f\u0131 bulunmayacakt\u0131r. \u201cAma e\u011fer (\u2026) biri g\u00f6l\u00fcn yaln\u0131zca var olmakla kalmay\u0131p ayr\u0131ca bilin\u00e7ten ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z bir ger\u00e7ekli\u011fi oldu\u011funu \u00f6ne s\u00fcrerse, buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k tekbenci de b\u00f6yle bir ger\u00e7e\u011fi yads\u0131rsa, her ikisi de art\u0131k empirik ara\u015ft\u0131rmac\u0131 olarak de\u011fil, metafizik\u00e7i olarak konu\u015fuyorlar demektir\u201d (Akarsu, 1979:161). Empirik ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar bitmi\u015f oldu\u011fundan ve bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f ayr\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 karara vard\u0131racak hi\u00e7 bir yol olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, ger\u00e7ek\u00e7i sav da solipist sav da anlaml\u0131 olarak kabul edilemez sonucuna var\u0131l\u0131r. <\/span><\/p>\n Hem do\u011frulamac\u0131l\u0131k hem de metafizi\u011fin anlams\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Popper taraf\u0131ndan ele\u015ftirilecektir.<\/p>\n B. DO\u011eRULAMACILI\u011eIN ELE\u015eT\u0130R\u0130S\u0130<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Popper do\u011frulamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 Hume Problemi olarak da adland\u0131r\u0131lan T\u00fcmevar\u0131m Problemi ve ayr\u0131ca S\u0131n\u0131rkoyma Problemi ba\u011flam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirir. Bu noktalara ge\u00e7meden \u00f6nce Popper\u2019in metafizi\u011fin anlams\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne ele\u015ftirisi, bu b\u00f6l\u00fcm i\u00e7in bir giri\u015f niteli\u011fi ta\u015f\u0131yacakt\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n 1. Metafizi\u011fin Anlaml\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 <\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re; metafizi\u011fin anlams\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ya da daha genel bir ifadeyle anlaml\u0131\/anlams\u0131z ayr\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ortaya konmas\u0131, hatal\u0131d\u0131r ve bu ayn\u0131 anda hem \u00e7ok geni\u015f hem de \u00e7ok dar bir tutumdur: Bilimsel kuramlar da dahil t\u00fcm d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceleri, inan\u00e7lar\u0131, iddialar\u0131 yads\u0131mas\u0131 ve anlams\u0131z k\u0131lmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan \u00e7ok geni\u015f, yaln\u0131zca empirik \u00f6nermeleri anlaml\u0131 k\u0131lmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan da \u00e7ok dard\u0131r. <\/span><\/p>\n \u201cKarl Popper\u2019le S\u00f6yle\u015fi\u201dde Magee\u2019nin; bilimin d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan her\u015feyin anlams\u0131z oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne Popper\u2019in hi\u00e7 kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 saptamas\u0131n\u0131 ortaya atmas\u0131 sonucu Popper bunu \u015f\u00f6yle yan\u0131tlar: <\/span><\/p>\n \u201cHay\u0131r, hi\u00e7bir zaman. Bence \u00e7\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclemez bir \u00f6nerme deney bilimlerinin olamaz, ama bu onu anlams\u0131z k\u0131lmaz. Bilimsel kuramlar\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n pek\u00e7o\u011fu s\u0131nanamaz bilim\u00f6ncesi kuramlardan geli\u015ftirildi. Newton\u2019un kuram\u0131n\u0131n ge\u00e7mi\u015finin izi Anaksimandros\u2019a Hesiedos\u2019a kadar geri g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fclebilir; eski atomculuk kuram\u0131 1905\u2019lere kadar s\u0131nanamaz olarak kald\u0131. Do\u011frusu bilimsel kuramlar\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n \u00e7o\u011fu bilim\u00f6ncesi \u00f6yk\u00fclerden do\u011fmu\u015ftur. Bu \u00f6yk\u00fclere \u2018anlams\u0131z\u2019 demenin yan\u0131lt\u0131c\u0131 olaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcyorum\u201d (Magee, 1996:29-30). <\/span><\/p>\n G\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc gibi Popper, metafizi\u011fin ne anlams\u0131z oldu\u011funu ne de bilimsel oldu\u011funu savunuyor. <\/span><\/p>\n a) T\u00fcmevar\u0131m (Hume) Problemi<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Bilimsel Ara\u015ft\u0131rman\u0131n Mant\u0131\u011f\u0131\u2019nda birinci b\u00f6l\u00fcmde Popper, konuya T\u00fcmevar\u0131m Problemi ile girer. Tekil \u00f6nermelerden t\u00fcmel \u00f6nermelere varma y\u00f6ntemine t\u00fcmevar\u0131m y\u00f6ntemi denir ve \u201ct\u00fcmevar\u0131ml\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131mlar\u0131n temellendirilip temellendirilemeyece\u011fi ya da hangi ko\u015fullarda temellendirilip temellendirilemeyece\u011fi sorusu t\u00fcmevar\u0131m sorunu olarak bilinir\u201d (Popper, 1996c: 36).<\/span><\/p>\n \u015eu basit \u00f6rnekle t\u00fcmevar\u0131m\u0131 ve t\u00fcmevar\u0131m problemini \u00f6rneklendirelelim: <\/span><\/p>\n \u201cBir ta\u015f\u0131 havaya bin kere att\u0131k ve hep geri d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc – hi\u00e7 bir zaman havada kalmad\u0131 ya da k\u00fcl gibi da\u011f\u0131lmad\u0131 ya da bir t\u0131rt\u0131la d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015fmedi. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla e\u011fer ileride bir ta\u015f\u0131 havaya atarsak onun yere d\u00fc\u015fece\u011fi sonucuna vard\u0131k. \u2018Her zaman yere d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyor.\u2019 \u00f6nermesinden \u2018Yere d\u00fc\u015fecek.\u2019 sonucunu ge\u00e7erli bir \u015fekilde \u00e7\u0131karamay\u0131z fakat her zaman d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc olgusal ger\u00e7ekli\u011fini, gelecekte de b\u00f6yle yapaca\u011f\u0131na delil kabul ederiz\u201d (Hospers, 1994:51). \u201cBu t\u00fcrden d\u00fczenlilikleri do\u011fa yasas\u0131 olarak kabul ederiz. Ama bu d\u00fczenliliklerin meydana gelmeye devam edece\u011fini nas\u0131l bilebiliriz [italikler benim]\u201d (Hospers, 1994:52-53).<\/span><\/p>\n \u0130\u015fte, bir t\u00fcmevar\u0131mc\u0131 bu tip bir soruya doyurucu bir yan\u0131t veremez, ancak \u015f\u00f6yle diyebilir: \u201cGelecekte de ge\u00e7mi\u015fte i\u015fledi\u011fi gibi i\u015fleyece\u011fine emin oldu\u011fumuz \u015feyler, yaz\u0131 tura at\u0131\u015flar\u0131 ya da ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6l\u00fcmleri de\u011fil do\u011fan\u0131n yasalar\u0131d\u0131r\u201d (Hospers, 1994:53). Ne var ki, \u015f\u00fcpheci g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f bunu yeterli bulmaz, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc ona g\u00f6re ge\u00e7mi\u015fte meydana gelen olaylar\u0131n gelecekte de devam edece\u011fine dair hi\u00e7bir mant\u0131ksal neden \u00f6ne s\u00fcr\u00fclemez. Hume bunu \u015f\u00f6yle dile getirir: <\/span><\/p>\n \u201c[deneylerden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan] b\u00fct\u00fcn delliller [ge\u00e7mi\u015fin gelece\u011fe] benzeyece\u011fi varsay\u0131m\u0131 ile temellendirildi\u011fi i\u00e7in; deneylerden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan herhangi bir delilin; ge\u00e7mi\u015fe benzerli\u011fini ispat edebilmesi imkans\u0131zd\u0131r. Olaylar\u0131n ak\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n her zaman d\u00fczenli oldu\u011funun \u00f6nceden kabul edilmesi tek ba\u015f\u0131na; yeni bir arg\u00fcman ya da yeni bir \u00e7\u0131karsama olmadan; bunun gelecekte de devam edece\u011fini ispatlamaz\u201d (aktaran, Hospers, 1994:55).<\/span><\/p>\n Hume\u2019un bu \u015f\u00fcphecili\u011fi Bertrand Russell\u2019a \u015fu saptamay\u0131 yapmas\u0131na neden olmu\u015ftur: \u201cUsd\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcn XIX. y\u00fczy\u0131l ile XX. y\u00fczy\u0131l\u0131n geride b\u0131rakt\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc boyunca g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi geli\u015fme, Hume\u2019un deneycili\u011fi y\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fal sonucudur\u201d (aktaran, Popper, 1996d:83).<\/span><\/p>\n Popper, Hume (t\u00fcmevar\u0131m) problemine bu ba\u011flamda hem mant\u0131ksal (Hm), hem de psikolojik (ruhbilimsel) (Hrb) olarak yakla\u015f\u0131r. <\/span><\/p>\n \u201cHm Deneylerimizin oldu\u011fu [yinelenmi\u015f] durumlardan, deneyimlerimizin olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 di\u011fer durumlara [sonu\u00e7lara] do\u011fru uslamlamada bulunmakta hakl\u0131 m\u0131y\u0131z? Hume\u2019un Hm\u2019ye yan\u0131t\u0131, ne kadar \u00e7ok olursa olsun, hay\u0131rd\u0131r. (\u2026) Hume\u2019un ruhbilimle ilgili sorunu \u015fudur: Hrb Neden akl\u0131 ba\u015f\u0131nda insanlar\u0131n t\u00fcm\u00fc, ger\u00e7ekten, deneyimini edinmi\u015f olmad\u0131klar\u0131 durumlar\u0131n, deneyimini edinmi\u015f olduklar\u0131 durumlara uyaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beklerler- buna inan\u0131rlar? (\u2026) Hume\u2019un Hrb\u2019ye yan\u0131t\u0131 \u015fudur: \u2018Huy ya da al\u0131\u015fkanl\u0131k\u2019 y\u00fcz\u00fcnden; yani, yinelemelerle, idealar\u0131mn \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131\u015f\u0131m mekanizmas\u0131yla ko\u015fulland\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z i\u00e7in; Hume, bu mekanizma olmasayd\u0131 ya\u015fam\u0131m\u0131z\u0131 s\u00fcrd\u00fcremezdik der\u201d (Popper, 1996d: 86-87).<\/span><\/p>\n Popper, t\u00fcmevar\u0131m sorununa yan\u0131t ararken Hume problemine bu \u015fekilde yakla\u015f\u0131r ve ruhbilimsel olan, inanaca dayal\u0131 terimleri yani \u00f6znel terimleri, nesnel terimlere \u00e7evirmekle i\u015fe ba\u015flar. Popper\u2019e (1996d:88-89) g\u00f6re \u201cbir kez mant\u0131ksal sorun Hm, \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcld\u00fc m\u00fc, \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm (\u2026) aktar\u0131m ilkesine dayanarak ruhbilimsel soruna Hrb\u2019ye aktar\u0131l\u0131r.\u201d Bu da Hume\u2019un usd\u0131\u015f\u0131c\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 d\u0131\u015far\u0131da b\u0131rak\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n Popper Hume\u2019un mant\u0131ksal sorununu yeniden \u015fu bi\u00e7imlerde dile getirir: Popper\u2019in bu soruya yan\u0131t\u0131 Hume\u2019unkiyle ayn\u0131d\u0131r: \u201cHay\u0131r, hakl\u0131 \u00e7\u0131karamay\u0131z; hi\u00e7bir say\u0131da do\u011fru test \u00f6nermesi, a\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131 bir evrensel kuram\u0131n do\u011fru oldu\u011fu sav\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 \u00e7\u0131karmaz.\u201d (Popper, 1996d:90)<\/span><\/p>\n Popper bu ak\u0131l y\u00fcr\u00fctmeyi ilerletir. Hume\u2019un \u201cdo\u011frudur\u201d kavram\u0131 yerine soruna \u201cdo\u011frudur ya da yanl\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u201d kavr\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 koyar:<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cM2 \u2018Deneysel gere\u00e7ekler\u2019 a\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131 bir kuram\u0131n doru ya da yanl\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu sav\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 \u00e7\u0131karabilir mi; yani, test \u00f6nermelerinin do\u011frulu\u011fu say\u0131lt\u0131s\u0131, ister evrensel bir kuram\u0131n do\u011fru oldu\u011fu sav\u0131n\u0131 ister yanl\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu [3]<\/i> sav\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 \u00e7\u0131karabilir mi?\u201d (Popper, 1996d: 90).<\/span><\/p>\n Popper\u2019in bu soruya yan\u0131t\u0131 olumludur.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cM3 B\u00f6yle \u2018deneysel gerek\u00e7eler\u2019, birbirleriyle \u00e7eli\u015fen evrensel kuramlar\u0131, do\u011frulu\u011fa ya da yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011fa g\u00f6re, bir di\u011ferine ye\u011flemeyi, hakl\u0131 \u00e7\u0131karabilir mi? M2\u2019ye yan\u0131t\u0131m \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda M3\u2019\u00fcn yan\u0131t\u0131 da a\u00e7\u0131k oluverir: Evet, \u015fansl\u0131ysak kimileyin hakl\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kabilir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc test \u00f6nermelerimiz, \u00e7eki\u015fen kuramlar\u0131n kimilerini -ama t\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc de\u011fil- \u00e7\u00fcr\u00fctebilir; madem ki do\u011fru bir kuram ar\u0131yoruz, yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kan\u0131tlanmam\u0131\u015f olanlar\u0131 ye\u011fleyece\u011fiz\u201d (Popper, 1996d: 90-91). <\/span><\/p>\n Bu ak\u0131l y\u00fcr\u00fctmelerle Popper, usd\u0131\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011fa g\u00f6t\u00fcren t\u00fcmevar\u0131m sorununa yan\u0131t buldu\u011funu s\u00f6yler. Yan\u0131t buldu\u011fu sorun \u015fudur: \u201cRussel, Hume\u2019un Hm\u2019ye verdi\u011fi yan\u0131tla a) ussall\u0131k, b) deneycilik, c) bilimsel i\u015flemler aras\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k oldu\u011funu vurgular\u201d (Popper, 1996d:88). \u0130\u015fte Popper, yan\u0131t\u0131yla, bilim ile deney aras\u0131ndaki uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k sorunu tersine \u00e7evirir. Bunu yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131k ile sa\u011flar.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00d6zetle Popper\u2019in verdi\u011fi yan\u0131tlar\u0131n anlam\u0131 \u015fudur: Popper, M1\u2019e verdi\u011fi yan\u0131t ile, kuramlara varsay\u0131msal ya da kestirimsel diyebilece\u011fimiz san\u0131lar olarak bakmam\u0131z gerekti\u011fini s\u00f6yler (Popper, 1996d:92). M2\u2019ye verdi\u011fi yan\u0131t yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131, M3\u2019e verdi\u011fi yan\u0131t, do\u011fruya tam olarak ula\u015f\u0131lamasa da do\u011fruya yak\u0131n olan\u0131n saptanabilce\u011fini, bir kuram\u0131n di\u011fer bir kurama ye\u011flenebilece\u011fini anlat\u0131r. <\/span><\/p>\n b) S\u0131n\u0131rkoyma Problemi<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n S\u0131n\u0131rkoyma Problemi (problem of demarcation) k\u0131saca bilim olan ile bilim olmayan aras\u0131ndaki s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n ne oldu\u011funu ortaya koyma problemidir. Popper\u2019in (1996c: 43) ifadesiyle; \u201cbir yandan deney bilimlerini \u00f6te yandan matematikle mant\u0131\u011f\u0131 oldu\u011fu kadar \u2018metafizik\u2019 dizgeleri birbirinden ay\u0131rabilmemizi sa\u011flayacak bir \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct bulma problemine s\u0131n\u0131rkoyma problemi\u201d denir. Daha \u00f6nce de a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, Viyana \u00c7evresine g\u00f6re bilim ile metafizi\u011fi birbirinden ay\u0131ran s\u0131n\u0131r, do\u011frulamac\u0131l\u0131kt\u0131r. Do\u011frulamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n ele\u015ftirisi ise, bu y\u00f6ntemin s\u0131n\u0131rkoyma \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct\u00fc olarak kullan\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6sterir.<\/span><\/p>\n Popper, do\u011frulamac\u0131l\u0131k ilkesi hem \u00e7ok geni\u015f hem de \u00e7ok dar derken kastetti\u011fi de bu y\u00f6ntemin aksakl\u0131klar\u0131 idi. E\u011fer bilim olan ile olmayan aras\u0131ndaki s\u0131n\u0131r, onun do\u011frulanabilirli\u011fi olsayd\u0131 o zaman bir teoloji de bilim kavram\u0131 alt\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilebilirdi, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc bir teolog d\u00fcnyaya her bak\u0131\u015f\u0131nda Tanr\u0131\u2019n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 do\u011frulayan binlerce empirik veri bize sunabilir. Popper buna, Marx\u2019\u0131n tarih kuram\u0131n\u0131 [4]<\/i>, Freud\u2019un ruh\u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc ve Alfred Adler\u2019in \u2018birey ruhbilimi\u2019 diye adland\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 kuram\u0131n\u0131 da ekliyor. <\/span><\/p>\n Adlerci ve Freudcu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f, Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re s\u00fcrekli do\u011frulanabilirdir; \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc birbirine z\u0131t, iki farkl\u0131 olayda dahi ayn\u0131 anahtar \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmleme her iki olay\u0131n da ayn\u0131 kefeye konulabilece\u011fini a\u00e7\u0131\u011fa \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cBir \u00e7ocu\u011fu bo\u011fmak niyetiyle suya iten adam\u0131n eylemiyle, \u00e7ocu\u011fu kurtarmak amac\u0131yla kendi can\u0131n\u0131 feda eden adam\u0131n davran\u0131\u015f\u0131. Bu iki olay\u0131n ikisi de hem Adlerci hem de Freudcu terimlerle ayn\u0131 kolayl\u0131kla a\u00e7\u0131klanabilir. Freud\u2019a g\u00f6re birinci adam bast\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f d\u00fcrt\u00fcleri (\u00f6rne\u011fin Oidipus kompleksinin bir bile\u015feni) y\u00fcz\u00fcnden hastad\u0131r, ikinci adam ise bunlar\u0131 y\u00fcceltmeyi ba\u015farm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Adler\u2019e g\u00f6re ise birinci adam\u0131n derdi a\u015fa\u011f\u0131l\u0131k duygusudur (ve olas\u0131l\u0131kla, bir su\u00e7 i\u015flemeye c\u00fcret edebilece\u011fini kendi kendine kan\u0131tlama ihtiyac\u0131 yaratmaktad\u0131r); ikinci adam\u0131nki de ayn\u0131d\u0131r (ancak bu kez duyulan ihtiya\u00e7, \u00e7ocu\u011fu kurtarmaya c\u00fcret edebilece\u011fini kan\u0131tlamaya y\u00f6neliktir)\u201d Popper, 1996a: 168).<\/span><\/p>\n K\u0131saca, bu kuramlar\u0131n asl\u0131nda en b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00e7ekicili\u011fi, en b\u00fcy\u00fck handikaplar\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturur Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re: Olgularca hep do\u011frulanmas\u0131. Peki Popper bu s\u0131n\u0131rkoyma probleminin \u00f6n\u00fcne nas\u0131l ge\u00e7er? Cevap yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131kt\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n C. \u00c7\u00d6Z\u00dcM \u00d6NER\u0130S\u0130: YANLI\u015eLAMACILIK<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Birinci ve ikinci k\u0131s\u0131mlarda, yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n arkaplan\u0131 ortaya konmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131. Burada art\u0131k yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n kendisi a\u00e7\u0131klanmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131lacak.<\/span><\/p>\n 1. \u0130\u00c7ER\u0130K VE OLASILIK<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Popper\u2019e (1963b:217) g\u00f6re \u201cdaha fazla empirik bilgi veya i\u00e7erik i\u00e7eren; mant\u0131ksal olarak daha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc olan; daha fazla a\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131 ve kestirimsel g\u00fcce sahip olan; ve bu nedenle (\u2026) daha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc s\u0131nanabilen kuramlar\u201d tercih edilebilir kuramlard\u0131r.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n O zaman buradan \u00e7\u0131kan sonu\u00e7, daha fazla empirik i\u00e7erik, daha az olas\u0131l\u0131k ve daha fazla s\u0131nanabilirliktir. Popper (1963b: 217-218) \u015fu \u00f6rne\u011fi verir: \u201ca \u2018Cuma g\u00fcn\u00fc ya\u011fmur ya\u011facak\u2019 \u00f6nermesi olsun; b \u2018Cumartesi g\u00fcn\u00fc hava g\u00fczel olacak\u2019 \u00f6nermesi olsun; ve ab \u2018Cuma g\u00fcn\u00fc ya\u011fmur ya\u011facak ve Cumartesi g\u00fcn\u00fc hava g\u00fczel olacak\u2019 \u00f6nermesi [olsun]\u201d; o zaman ab \u00f6nermesinin i\u00e7eri\u011fi, bile\u015fenleri olan a ve b \u00f6nermelerinden daha fazla olacakt\u0131r ve ab\u2019nin olas\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 da bile\u015fenleri olan a ve b \u00f6nermelerinden daha az olacakt\u0131r. Bu durumlar \u015f\u00f6yle form\u00fcle edilebilir:<\/span><\/p>\n 1) Ct(a) \u00a3 Ct(ab) \u00b3 Ct(b) {Ct = i\u00e7erik, content}<\/span><\/p>\n 2) p(a) \u00b3 p(ab) \u00a3 p(b) {p = olas\u0131l\u0131k, probability}<\/span><\/p>\n Sonu\u00e7 olarak; i\u00e7erik, ihtimalsizlik (improbability) artt\u0131k\u00e7a artar; o zaman y\u00fcksek olas\u0131l\u0131k bizim amac\u0131m\u0131z olamaz, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc bizim amac\u0131m\u0131z daha y\u00fcksek i\u00e7eriktir. Ba\u015fka bir ifadeyle, madem ki biz daha y\u00fcksek i\u00e7eri\u011fi ama\u00e7l\u0131yoruz, o zaman biz ayn\u0131 zamanda daha d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olas\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ama\u00e7lamal\u0131y\u0131z: \u201cMadem ki d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olas\u0131l\u0131k y\u00fcksek yanl\u0131\u015flanma olas\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 anlam\u0131na geliyor, [o zaman] bunu takiben y\u00fcksek yanl\u0131\u015flanabilirlik veya \u00e7\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclebilirlik veya s\u0131nanabilirlik derecesi, bilimin ama\u00e7lar\u0131ndan birisidir\u201d (Popper, 1963b: 219) ki bu da asl\u0131nda y\u00fcksek bilgiverici i\u00e7erik ile tam olarak ayn\u0131 \u015feydir.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00d6zetle, madem ki y\u00fcksek i\u00e7erik bilimin amac\u0131d\u0131r, o zaman y\u00fcksek yanl\u0131\u015flanabilirlik de bilimin amac\u0131d\u0131r, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc bu ikisi ayn\u0131 \u015feyi ifadelendirir. Popper\u2019in mant\u0131ksal \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131m\u0131, yanl\u0131\u015flamay\u0131 bilimin amac\u0131 olarak ortaya koyar ve Popper\u2019in bilim felsefesinin de en \u00f6nemli sonucudur. Bu \u00f6neri ayr\u0131ca bilim olan ile bilim olmayan aras\u0131ndaki s\u0131n\u0131rkoyma problemine de getirilen \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmd\u00fcr: Yanl\u0131\u015flanamayan kuramlar, bilimsel de\u011fildir.<\/span><\/p>\n Bu ba\u011flamda, bir bilimadam\u0131na d\u00fc\u015fen, kuram\u0131n\u0131 yanl\u0131\u015flamaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmakt\u0131r; \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc Popper\u2019e (1996b:219) g\u00f6re \u201cbir kuram\u0131 yanl\u0131\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z her zaman, \u00f6nemli bir yeni bulu\u015fta bulunuruz.\u201d Bu nokta bizi bilimsel bilginin geli\u015fimine g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcr; bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe g\u00f6re bilimsel bilgi yanl\u0131\u015flamalar ile ilerlemektedir.<\/span><\/p>\n Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re \u201cepistemolojinin her zaman olagelen ve hala da olmaya devam eden merkezi problemi, bilginin geli\u015fimi problemidir. Ve bilginin geli\u015fimi en iyi bilimsel bilginin geli\u015fimi ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131larak \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131labilir\u201d (Popper, 1965:15).<\/span><\/p>\n Popper\u2019de bilginin geli\u015fimini a\u00e7\u0131klayan bir \u00f6rnek Magee\u2019nin Karl Popper\u2019in Bilim Felsefesi ve Siyaset Kuram\u0131 adl\u0131 eserinden bulunabilir.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cDiyelim ki, \u00e7ocu\u011fumuza okulda \u00f6\u011fretildi\u011fi gibi, suyun 100 santigrad derecesinde kaynad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bilimsel bir yasa oldu\u011funa inanmakla i\u015fe ba\u015fl\u0131yoruz. Do\u011frulay\u0131c\u0131 durumlar ne denli \u00e7ok olursa olsun, bunu kan\u0131tlamaya yetmez; ama ge\u00e7erli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 durumlar\u0131 arayarak, bunu s\u0131nayabilriz. (\u2026) Hayal g\u00fcc\u00fcm\u00fcz\u00fc yeterince i\u015fletirsek, \u00e7ok ge\u00e7meden, suyun kapal\u0131 kaplarda 100 santigrad derecesinde kaynamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ke\u015ffederiz. B\u00f6ylelikle bilimsel bir yasa sand\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z \u015feyin \u00f6yle olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131r. \u015eimdi, bu noktada yanl\u0131\u015f yola sapabilir, ba\u015ftaki \u00f6nermemizi, deneyci i\u00e7eri\u011fini \u015f\u00f6ylece daraltarak kurtarmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015fabilirz:<> Bundan sonra, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u00f6nermemizi yalanlama yolunda sistemli bir giri\u015fime ba\u015flayabilirz. Ve bu b\u00f6ylece s\u00fcr\u00fcp gider\u201d (Magee, 1993:22).<\/span><\/p>\n Elbette \u00f6rne\u011fimiz bu bi\u00e7imde devam etmemeli; \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc \u00f6nceki b\u00f6l\u00fcmde g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc gibi bilim daha fazla i\u00e7erik pe\u015findedir, daha az de\u011fil. O zaman yanl\u0131\u015flama durumunda ilkinin handikab\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klayabilen ba\u015fka bir kuram geli\u015ftirmeliyiz. \u00d6rne\u011fin <> kendimize sorulmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu b\u00f6yle devam eder; \u201cbilgimizi art\u0131r\u0131r ve daha iyi bir kuram aray\u0131\u015f\u0131m\u0131z\u0131 yeniden ba\u015flat\u0131r\u201d (Magee, 1993:23).<\/span><\/p>\n Buna bir \u00f6rnek de Popper\u2019den verirsek, \u015fu s\u00f6ylenebilir: \u201cKepler ve Galileo\u2019nin kuramlar\u0131 Newton\u2019un mant\u0131ksal olarak daha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc ve daha iyi s\u0131nanabilir kuram\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan birle\u015ftirildi ve ge\u00e7ildi, ve benzer bir \u015fekilde, Fresnel\u2019inki ve Faraday\u2019\u0131nki de Maxwell\u2019inki taraf\u0131ndan ge\u00e7ildi. Newton\u2019unki ve Maxwell\u2019inki de (\u2026) Enstein\u2019\u0131nki taraf\u0131ndan ge\u00e7ildi. Herbir durumda ilerleme daha bilgiverici ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla az olas\u0131 kuramlara do\u011fru oldu. (Popper, 1963b:220).<\/span><\/p>\n Burada \u00f6nemli olan bir nokta, kuram\u0131 de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fe u\u011frat\u0131rken ad hoc [5] <\/i>de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fe ba\u015fvurmamakt\u0131r. Yani bu de\u011fi\u015fiklikler de ayr\u0131ca s\u0131nanabilir olmal\u0131d\u0131rlar. <\/span><\/p>\n \u201cBaz\u0131 ger\u00e7ekten s\u0131nanabilir kuramlar, s\u0131nan\u0131p yanl\u0131\u015f olduklar\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra da hayranlar\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan -\u00f6rne\u011fin bir ad hoc yard\u0131mc\u0131 say\u0131lt\u0131 devreye sokularak, ya da b\u00fct\u00fcn kuram \u00e7\u00fcr\u00fctmeden ka\u00e7\u0131r\u0131lacak bi\u00e7imde gene ad hoc olarak yeniden yorumlanmak suretiyle savunulma\u011fa devam edebilir. (\u2026) B\u00f6yle bir kurtarma i\u015flemini daha sonra \u2018uzla\u015fmac\u0131 \u00e7arp\u0131tma\u2019 ya da \u2018uzla\u015fmac\u0131 hile\u2019 ad\u0131 alt\u0131nda betimledim\u201d (Popper, 1996a:170).<\/span><\/p>\n 3. Do\u011fruya Yak\u0131nl\u0131k ve Ye\u011fleme<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n A\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere Popper bir do\u011frunun oldu\u011funu kabul etmesine kar\u015f\u0131n, do\u011fruya ula\u015f\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunur; ancak do\u011fruya yak\u0131nl\u0131k ve ye\u011fleme d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi do\u011fruya yakla\u015fma ve bilginin geli\u015fimi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesini besler. Yukar\u0131da anlat\u0131lan durumda oldu\u011fu gibi, bilgi \u0130lerlemekte ve do\u011fruya yakla\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Peki, Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re mevcut kuramlar aras\u0131nda bir ye\u011fleme nas\u0131l yap\u0131l\u0131r? Bu ba\u011flamda bir kuram\u0131n \u00f6teki kuramdan daha fazla do\u011fruya yak\u0131n (verisimilitude) oldu\u011funu nas\u0131l anlar\u0131z?<\/span><\/p>\n t2 ve t1 kuramlar\u0131m\u0131z ve t2 de olgulara daha \u00e7ok uygun olsun. (Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re -Tarski\u2019nin g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc do\u011frultusunda- do\u011fru, olgulara tekab\u00fcl edendir. Yani \u201cbir teori, ancak ve ancak ondan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan g\u00f6zlem \u00f6nermeleri do\u011fru ise (olgulara tekab\u00fcl ediyorsa) do\u011frudur\u201d (Chalmers, 1990:211).) Bu durumda t2 a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki \u00f6zelliklerde t1\u2019den adaha g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc olaca\u011f\u0131ndan, do\u011fruya daha yak\u0131nd\u0131r; yani di\u011ferine g\u00f6re ye\u011flenebilirdir:<\/span><\/p>\n t2 t1\u2019den daha kesin iddialara sahiptir ve daha kesin testlere dayanabilmektedir. \u201cBizim alt\u0131 olay listemiz i\u00e7in, t2 kuram\u0131n\u0131n empirik i\u00e7eri\u011fi t1 kuram\u0131n\u0131nkini a\u015fmaktad\u0131r\u201d (Popper, 1963b: 232). Bu durumda t2 do\u011fruya daha yak\u0131nd\u0131r ve daha ye\u011flenebilir bir kuramd\u0131r. (E\u011fer her iki kuram da yanl\u0131\u015f ise, daha kesin deneylerden ge\u00e7en t2 tercih edilmelidir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc yanl\u0131\u015f i\u00e7eri\u011fi daha az olacakt\u0131r (Popper, 1963b: 235).<\/span><\/p>\n Do\u011fruya yak\u0131nl\u0131k \u015f\u00f6yle form\u00fclle\u015ftirilebilir (Popper, 1963b: 234):<\/span><\/p>\n Vs(a) = CtT(a) – CtF(a); yani do\u011fru i\u00e7erik eksi yanl\u0131\u015f i\u00e7erik.<\/span><\/p>\n Bu durumda Vs(a), iki durumda artacakt\u0131r:<\/span><\/p>\n CtF ayn\u0131 kal\u0131rken CtT artar ise Bu durumda yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131k, yanl\u0131\u015f i\u00e7eri\u011fi d\u0131\u015far\u0131 ataca\u011f\u0131ndan do\u011fruya yak\u0131nl\u0131\u011f\u0131 sa\u011flayan bir y\u00f6ntemdir sonucuna var\u0131labilir.<\/span><\/p>\n SONU\u00c7 <\/b><\/span><\/p>\n \u015eu ana kadar Popper\u2019in kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131 geleneksel bilimsel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f ile Popper\u2019in buna kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klanmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131ld\u0131. \u00d6zetle a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki tablo, Popper\u2019in ele\u015ftirdi\u011fi geleneksel t\u00fcmevar\u0131mc\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc betimlemektedir.<\/p>\n T\u00fcmevar\u0131msal (gelenksel) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f1. G\u00f6zlem ve Deney2. T\u00fcmevar\u0131msal genelleme3. Varsay\u0131m4. Varsay\u0131m\u0131 do\u011frulama giri\u015fimi5. Do\u011fruluk ya da yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n kan\u0131tlanmas\u01316. BilgiKaynak: (Magee, 1993:51).<\/span><\/p>\n Popper\u2019in, 2. ve 4. s\u0131rada yer alan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fleri nas\u0131l ele\u015ftirdi\u011fi zaten makalenin temel konusunu olu\u015fturuyordu; ancak Popper bu s\u0131ralamada ayr\u0131ca 1. ve 3. s\u0131rada yer alan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fleri de ele\u015ftirmektedir. Popper\u2019in \u201cbilimin g\u00f6zlemden kurama do\u011fru ilerledi\u011fine dair geleneksel g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u201d ele\u015ftirisine daha \u00f6nce makalede de\u011finilmedi\u011finden, bu ana b\u00f6l\u00fcmde \u201chipotezin, tezin, kuram\u0131n g\u00f6zlemden \u00f6nce geldi\u011fi\u201d sav\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamak yerinde olacakt\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201ckurama benzer hi\u00e7bir\u015fey devreye girmeksizin salt g\u00f6zlemden yola \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z fikri sa\u00e7mad\u0131r.(\u2026) Yirmi be\u015f y\u0131l \u00f6nce, Viyana\u2019da bir grup fizik \u00f6\u011frencisine ayn\u0131 noktay\u0131 kavratma\u011fa \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131rken, dersime a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki y\u00f6nergeyle ba\u015flad\u0131m: \u2018ka\u011f\u0131t kalem al\u0131n; dikkatle g\u00f6zleyin, ve g\u00f6zlediklerinizi yaz\u0131n!\u2019 Belli ki \u2018G\u00f6zle!\u2019 komutu sa\u00e7mad\u0131r. (Hatta deyim olarak bile anlams\u0131zd\u0131r, me\u011fer ki ge\u00e7i\u015fli eylemin nesnesi \u00f6nceden biliniyor say\u0131ls\u0131n.) G\u00f6zlem her zaman se\u00e7icidir. Se\u00e7ilmi\u015f bir nesne, belirlenmi\u015f bir ama\u00e7, bir ilgi, bir bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131, bir sorun gereksinir\u201d (Popper, 1996: 185).<\/span><\/p>\n Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re bir yaratma mant\u0131\u011f\u0131 yoktur. Yani varsay\u0131m, g\u00f6zlem ve deney sonucu ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmaz. Herhangi bir \u015fekilde olu\u015fabilir. Bu ba\u011flamda bir bilimsel kuram, bilim-\u00f6ncesi s\u00f6ylenlerden de ilham alabilir. \u00d6nemli olan, Popper\u2019e g\u00f6re kuram\u0131, sistemli yanl\u0131\u015flama \u00e7abas\u0131d\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n Sonu\u00e7 itibariyle, Popper\u2019in y\u00f6ntemi \u015f\u00f6yle form\u00fclle\u015ftirilebilir.<\/span><\/p>\n S1-DdK-YdB-S2; yani, \u201cbir sorun vard\u0131r (S1), bu soruna deneme niteli\u011findeki bir kuramla \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm sunulur (DnK), sonra bu kuram ele\u015ftirilir [italikler benim], yanl\u0131\u015flar\u0131 d\u0131\u015far\u0131da b\u0131rak\u0131lmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131l\u0131r (YdB), bu da yeni bir soruna yol a\u00e7ar (S2)\u201d (G\u00fczel, 1996: 12). <\/span><\/p>\n YARARLANILAN KAYNAKLAR<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Akarsu, Prof. B. (1979) \u00c7a\u011fda\u015f Felsefe Ak\u0131mlar\u0131, \u0130stanbul, Milli E\u011fitim Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, 302 sayfa. Dipnotlar<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n 1) <\/b>Her iki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn pozitivist olarak de\u011ferlerndirilmesinde en temel d\u00f6rt nokta \u015fudur: 1.Y\u00f6ntembilimsel tek\u00e7ilik, 2. olguculuk (deney ve g\u00f6zlem), 3. nesnellik, 4. bilimsel olan ile bilimsel olmayan aras\u0131ndaki s\u0131n\u0131r. Ancak hemen belirtilmelidir ki, do\u011frulamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n ve yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonu\u00e7lar \u015fu d\u00f6rt temel noktalar a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan birbirinden \u00e7ok farkl\u0131d\u0131r: 1. Do\u011fruya (truth-hakikat) ula\u015f\u0131labilirlik, 2. bilimsel bilginin geli\u015fimi, 3. bilimsel olmayan bilgi t\u00fcrlerinin anlaml\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131, 4. nesnelli\u011fin sa\u011flanmas\u0131. Hasan Engin Şener Bu yazı daha önce Demokrasi Kuşağı için Girişim (Cilt I, No. 1, 1999, s. 6-15) dergisinde de yayımlanmıştır… GİRİŞ Bilim nedir? Bilim olanla olmayan arasında bir sınır var mıdır? Eğer bir sınır varsa, bilimsel olmayan önermeler anlamsız mıdır? Bilim nesnel midir? Nesnellik varsa, nasıl sağlanmaktadır? Bilimsel bilgi bir gelişim içinde midir? Eğer […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"ocean_post_layout":"","ocean_both_sidebars_style":"","ocean_both_sidebars_content_width":0,"ocean_both_sidebars_sidebars_width":0,"ocean_sidebar":"0","ocean_second_sidebar":"0","ocean_disable_margins":"enable","ocean_add_body_class":"","ocean_shortcode_before_top_bar":"","ocean_shortcode_after_top_bar":"","ocean_shortcode_before_header":"","ocean_shortcode_after_header":"","ocean_has_shortcode":"","ocean_shortcode_after_title":"","ocean_shortcode_before_footer_widgets":"","ocean_shortcode_after_footer_widgets":"","ocean_shortcode_before_footer_bottom":"","ocean_shortcode_after_footer_bottom":"","ocean_display_top_bar":"default","ocean_display_header":"default","ocean_header_style":"","ocean_center_header_left_menu":"0","ocean_custom_header_template":"0","ocean_custom_logo":0,"ocean_custom_retina_logo":0,"ocean_custom_logo_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_tablet_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_mobile_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_max_height":0,"ocean_custom_logo_tablet_max_height":0,"ocean_custom_logo_mobile_max_height":0,"ocean_header_custom_menu":"0","ocean_menu_typo_font_family":"0","ocean_menu_typo_font_subset":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_size":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_unit":"px","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight_tablet":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight_mobile":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform_tablet":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform_mobile":"","ocean_menu_typo_line_height":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_unit":"","ocean_menu_typo_spacing":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_unit":"","ocean_menu_link_color":"","ocean_menu_link_color_hover":"","ocean_menu_link_color_active":"","ocean_menu_link_background":"","ocean_menu_link_hover_background":"","ocean_menu_link_active_background":"","ocean_menu_social_links_bg":"","ocean_menu_social_hover_links_bg":"","ocean_menu_social_links_color":"","ocean_menu_social_hover_links_color":"","ocean_disable_title":"default","ocean_disable_heading":"default","ocean_post_title":"","ocean_post_subheading":"","ocean_post_title_style":"","ocean_post_title_background_color":"","ocean_post_title_background":0,"ocean_post_title_bg_image_position":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_attachment":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_repeat":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_size":"","ocean_post_title_height":0,"ocean_post_title_bg_overlay":0.5,"ocean_post_title_bg_overlay_color":"","ocean_disable_breadcrumbs":"default","ocean_breadcrumbs_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_separator_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_links_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_links_hover_color":"","ocean_display_footer_widgets":"default","ocean_display_footer_bottom":"default","ocean_custom_footer_template":"0","ocean_post_oembed":"","ocean_post_self_hosted_media":"","ocean_post_video_embed":"","ocean_link_format":"","ocean_link_format_target":"self","ocean_quote_format":"","ocean_quote_format_link":"post","ocean_gallery_link_images":"off","ocean_gallery_id":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[126],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-9574","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-aydin-adige-abhaz-gencligi","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9574","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9574"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9574\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9576,"href":"https:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9574\/revisions\/9576"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9574"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9574"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.circassiancenter.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9574"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n<\/b> <\/span> Bu yaz\u0131 daha \u00f6nce Demokrasi Ku\u015fa\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in Giri\u015fim (Cilt I, No. 1, 1999, s. 6-15) dergisinde de yay\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r…<\/span><\/p>\n
\nPopper\u2019in felsefesiyle ilgili \u00f6nemli noktalar yakalayabilece\u011fimiz \u201cPreface to the English Edition\u201d ile devam edecek olursak Popper\u2019in (1965:17) ussal tart\u0131\u015fman\u0131n olmas\u0131 gereklili\u011fini espirili bir dille ifadelendirdi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fcl\u00fcr: \u201c\u015e\u00fcphesiz Tanr\u0131 temelde kendisiyle konu\u015fur; \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc O, konu\u015fmaya tenezz\u00fcl edecek birisine sahip de\u011fildir. Fakat felsefeciler, di\u011fer insanlardan daha fazla tanr\u0131-benzeri (godlike) olmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 bilmelidirler.\u201d Bu noktada Popper, tart\u0131\u015fmaman\u0131n \u201cTanr\u0131sal\u201d \u00f6zelli\u011fine dikkat \u00e7ekerek insanlar\u0131n Tanr\u0131 olmad\u0131klar\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 gerekti\u011fini, insan\u0131n temel \u00f6zelliklerinden biri olarak ortaya koyar. Tam bu noktada \u201camip ile Einstein aras\u0131ndaki fark\u0131n ortaya konulmas\u0131\u201d anlaml\u0131 olacakt\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nII. YANLI\u015eLAMACILI\u011eA DO\u011eRU<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n
\n2. T\u00fcmevar\u0131m ve Do\u011frulamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n Sorunlar\u0131<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n
\n\u201cM1 A\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131 evrensel kuram\u0131n do\u011fru oldu\u011fu sav\u0131 \u2018deneysel gere\u00e7ekler\u2019 arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla (\u2026) birtak\u0131m test \u00f6nermelerinin ya da g\u00f6zlem \u00f6nermelerinin (ki deneye dayand\u0131klar\u0131 s\u00f6ylenebilir) do\u011frulu\u011fu varsay\u0131larak hakl\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131labilir mi?\u201d (Popper, 1996d:89-90).<\/span><\/p>\n
\n2. Bilimsel Bilginin Geli\u015fimi<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n
\nt2 t1\u2019den daha fazla olguyu a\u00e7\u0131klamaktad\u0131r.
\nt2 t1\u2019den daha fazla detay\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klar.
\nt2 t1\u2019in ge\u00e7emedi\u011fi testlerden ge\u00e7ti.
\nt2 t1\u2019in ileri s\u00fcrmedi\u011fi, yeni deneysel testler ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc.
\nt2 \u015fimdiye kadar ili\u015fkili olmayan problemlerle ba\u011flant\u0131 kurdu.<\/span><\/p>\n
\nCtT ayn\u0131 kal\u0131rken CtF azal\u0131r ise<\/span><\/p>\n
\nChalmers, A. (1990) Bilim Dedikleri, H\u00fcsamettin Arslan (\u00e7ev.) Ankara, Vadi Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, 256 sayfa.
\nG\u00fczel C. (1996) \u201cSa\u011fduyu Filozofu: Popper,\u201d i\u00e7., Cemal G\u00fczel (der.-\u00e7ev.) Sa\u011fduyu Filozofu: Popper, Ankara, Bilim ve Sanat Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, s.7-16
\nHospers, J. (1994) \u201cBilimsel Bilgi,\u201d N. Emrah Ayd\u0131nonat (\u00e7ev.), Ankara, 65 sayfa.
\nIrz\u0131k, G. (1990) \u201cKarl Popper\u2019in \u00dc\u00e7 D\u00fcnya Kuram\u0131 ve Bilimsel Bilginin Nesnelli\u011fi,\u201d Felsefe Tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131, 9.Kitap, \u0130stanbul, Kent Bas\u0131mevi, s.84-94.
\nMagee, B. (1979b) \u201cMant\u0131k\u00e7\u0131 Pozitivizm ve Kal\u0131t\u0131 – A. Ayer ile S\u00f6yle\u015fi,\u201d Ayta\u00e7 Oksal (\u00e7ev.) i\u00e7., Magee, B. (der.) Tun\u00e7ay M. (Bas.Haz.) Yeni D\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn Adamlar\u0131, \u0130stanbul, Milli E\u011fitim Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, s.167-193.
\n———- (1993) Karl Popper\u2019in Bilim Felsefesi ve Siyaset Kuram\u0131, Mete Tun\u00e7ay (\u00e7ev.) \u0130stanbul, Remzi Kitabevi, 147 sayfa.
\n———- (1996) \u201cKarl Popper\u2019le S\u00f6yle\u015fi,\u201d Cemal G\u00fczel (\u00e7ev.) i\u00e7., G\u00fczel C. (der.\u00e7ev.), Sa\u011fduyu Filozofu: Popper, s.17-34.
\nPopper, K.R. (1963a) \u201cTowards A Rational Theory Of Tradition,\u201d i\u00e7., Conjectures And Refutations, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, s.120-135.
\n———- (1963b) \u201cTruht, Rationality, And The Growth Of Scientific Knowledge,\u201d i\u00e7., Conjectures And Refutations, s.214-250.
\n———- (1965) \u201cPreface to the English Edition, 1958,\u201d i\u00e7.,The Logic Of Scientific Discovery, Fourth Impression, London, Hutchinson Of London, s.15-23.
\n———- (1996a) \u201cBilim: Kestirimler, \u00c7\u00fcr\u00fctmeler,\u201d \u0130smet Birkan (\u00e7ev.) i\u00e7., G\u00fczel C. (der.\u00e7ev.), Sa\u011fduyu Filozofu: Popper, s.165-212.
\n———- (1996b) \u201cBilimin Amac\u0131,\u201d Cemal G\u00fczel (\u00e7ev.) i\u00e7., G\u00fczel C. (der.\u00e7ev.), Sa\u011fduyu Filozofu: Popper, s.213-228.
\n———- (1996c) \u201cBilimsel Ara\u015ft\u0131rma Mant\u0131\u011f\u0131\u2019ndan,\u201d Cemal G\u00fczel (\u00e7ev.-\u201cKuramlar\u201d b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc Kurulu\u015f Din\u00e7er ile) i\u00e7., G\u00fczel C. (der.\u00e7ev.), Sa\u011fduyu Filozofu: Popper, s.35-83.
\n———- (1996d) \u201cKestirimsel Bilgi: T\u00fcmevar\u0131m Sorununa \u0130li\u015fkin \u00c7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcm,\u201d Cemal G\u00fczel (\u00e7ev.) i\u00e7., G\u00fczel C. (der.\u00e7ev.), Sa\u011fduyu Filozofu: Popper, s.83-114.
\n———- (1996e) \u201c\u00d6znesiz Bilgikuram\u0131,\u201d Cemal G\u00fczel (\u00e7ev.) i\u00e7., G\u00fczel C. (der.\u00e7ev.), Sa\u011fduyu Filozofu: Popper, s.114-163.<\/span><\/p>\n
\n2) <\/b>\u201c(\u2026) H\u0131s\u0131ml\u0131k ili\u015fkileri, toplumsal \u00f6rg\u00fctlenme ve y\u00f6netim bi\u00e7imleri, yasa, g\u00f6renek, uyla\u015f\u0131m, gelenek, ba\u011fla\u015fma ve d\u00fc\u015fmanl\u0131klar, ayin t\u00f6renleri, din, efsane, bo\u015finan\u00e7, dil -bunlar\u0131n hepsi insan-yap\u0131s\u0131yd\u0131, ama hi\u00e7biri onun taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131 ve \u00e7o\u011fu, onun taraf\u0131ndan de\u011fi\u015ftirilebilecek gibi de\u011fildi, hatta onun ku\u015fkulanmas\u0131na bile a\u00e7\u0131k bulunmuyordu. Bundan \u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fc, bu soyutlamalar her bir insana kar\u015f\u0131, onu do\u011fumundan itibaren bi\u00e7imlendiren, insansal k\u0131lan, ya\u015fam\u0131ndaki hemen hemen her \u015feyi belirleye bir \u00e7e\u015fit nesnel ger\u00e7eklik olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131k\u0131yorlard\u0131, yine de yar\u0131 \u00f6zerk gibiydiler\u201d (Magee, 1993:53-54).
\n3)<\/b> Bu yanl\u0131\u015flamac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n temel sav\u0131d\u0131r: Temel (tikel) \u00f6nermelerden t\u00fcmel \u00f6nermelere gidilemez, ama t\u00fcmel bir \u00f6nerme, kendisine ayk\u0131r\u0131 temel bir \u00f6nerme taraf\u0131ndan yanl\u0131\u015flanabilir. \u00d6rne\u011fin; \u201c\u00d6nc\u00fcl: Siyah olmayan bir kuzgun x mevkinde t zaman\u0131nda g\u00f6zlemlendi.\u201d Bu durumda \u2018B\u00fct\u00fcn kuzgunlar siyaht\u0131r\u2019 \u00f6nermesi yanl\u0131\u015fland\u0131: \u201cSonu\u00e7: B\u00fct\u00fcn kuzgunlar siyah de\u011fildir\u201d (Chalmers, 1990:83).
\n4)<\/b> \u201cBir Marx\u00e7\u0131 gazetesini a\u00e7mayag\u00f6rs\u00fcn, her sayfas\u0131nda kendi tarih g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc do\u011frulayan kan\u0131tlar bulmamazl\u0131k edemiyordu; hem de sadece haberlerde de\u011fil bunlar\u0131n sunulu\u015funda -ki buras\u0131 gazetenin s\u0131n\u0131fsal yanl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ele veriyordu- ve elbette \u00f6zellikle gazetenin s\u00f6ylemediklerinde de\u201d Popper, 1996a:168).<\/span>
\n5)<\/b> Bir \u00f6rnek bunu a\u00e7\u0131layabilir: \u201cBu ger\u00e7ekten de on yedinci y\u00fczy\u0131l\u0131n ba\u015flar\u0131nda Galileo ile Aristoteles\u00e7i bir hasm\u0131 aras\u0131nda vuku bulan bir kar\u015f\u0131la\u015fmaya dayanan bir \u00f6rnektir. Yeni icat edilen teleskopu vas\u0131tas\u0131yla ay\u0131 dikkatle g\u00f6zlemledi\u011finden Galileo, ay\u0131n p\u00fcr\u00fczs\u00fcz bir k\u00fcre de\u011fil, da\u011flar ve kraterlerle dolu bir k\u00fcre oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yleyebilmi\u015fti. (\u2026) Fakat g\u00f6zlemler, Aristoteles\u00e7ilerin temel bir nosyonunu tehdit ediyordu. Galileo\u2019nin rakibi, teorisini, apa\u00e7\u0131k yanl\u0131\u015flama kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda savundu ki bu bariz ad hoc\u2019du. O, ay\u0131n y\u00fczeyinde, ay k\u00fcresi tam p\u00fcr\u00fczs\u00fcz k\u00fcre olacak \u015fekilde kraterleri dolduran ve da\u011flar\u0131 kaplayan g\u00f6r\u00fclemez bir madde oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u201d (Chalmers, 1990: 102).<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"