Dive into the clash between Karl Popper and William Bartley as they debate fideism and critical rationalism. Explore how faith and reason interact, with Bartley's accusations bringing a fresh perspective on Popper's philosophy. The discussion wanders through personal beliefs and the emotional weight of rationality, and how cosmological views can shape one's understanding of truth. From existential dilemmas to the nuances of rational choice, this conversation challenges the boundaries between belief systems and rational thought.
The podcast examines fideism as a belief system that emphasizes faith's role in uncovering truths, contrasting with rationalist views.
Hosts discuss the historical conflict between Popper and Bartley, revealing personal dynamics that influenced their philosophical disagreements.
The conversation explores the relationship between rationality and faith, questioning whether faith in reason is essential for rational thought.
Deep dives
Defining Fideism
Fideism is discussed as a belief system emphasizing faith's central role in seeking truth, often contrasting with rationalism. The hosts explore how some interpretations view fideism as prioritizing faith over empirical reasoning, suggesting that a belief in foundational principles, like the validity of reason, requires some level of faith. This leads to the interesting notion that even within rationalism, an underlying faith in reason itself may be essential. The conversation highlights the complexity and multitude of meanings associated with fideism, illustrating its relevance in philosophical discussions.
The Popper-Bartley Dispute
The podcast delves into the historical fallout between philosophers Karl Popper and William Bartley, focusing on Bartley's accusation that Popper harbored fideist beliefs. This accusation, which Popper found objectionable, arose during a philosophical conference when Bartley challenged Popper's position on rationalism. The hosts note that Agassi, who was present at the time, provides an account of the disagreement, suggesting it stemmed not just from philosophical differences but personal animosities as well. Their exploration emphasizes the nuances of philosophical debates and the personal dynamics that can influence them.
The Nature of Critical Rationalism
The hosts discuss critical rationalism, which Popper advocates as rejecting the need for ultimate proof or dogmatic beliefs. They examine how this framework accepts the possibility of criticism and improvement, instead of relying on unquestionable foundations. Agassi's interpretation of Popper’s stance is scrutinized, revealing a potential disagreement regarding the necessity of starting premises for rationalism. The discussion raises essential questions about whether critical rationalism can truly be comprehensive or if it inherently requires a form of faith.
Interpretations of Reason and Faith
The dialogue shifts to the relationship between rationality and faith, questioning whether a commitment to reason can exist independently of faith. The hosts contemplate Agassi's position that while Popper indicates faith is necessary for rationality, it should not be understood as blind faith but rather as a working hypothesis subject to scrutiny. It emphasizes a distinction between accepting reason as a foundational belief versus viewing it as an open, critique-friendly framework. This nuanced discussion invites listeners to reflect on their own perspectives regarding the interplay between faith and reason.
Understanding the Philosophical Landscape
The conversation highlights the broader philosophical implications of rationalism, iterating that the definitions and applications of terms like 'faith' and 'rationality' can vary significantly across different contexts. Bartley’s view, which positions rationalism as comprehensive, is contrasted with Popper’s perspective that it is not, especially when viewed through the lens of instrumental and epistemic rationalities. The hosts contemplate how various philosophical positions can coexist or conflict, leading to richer discussions about the roles of tradition, criticism, and belief in shaping understanding. Through examining these philosophical landscapes, they invite listeners into a complex web of ideas worth exploring.
The Role of Cosmology in Rational Thought
The podcast introduces cosmology's influence on rational thought, suggesting that our understanding of the universe shapes how we perceive the relationship between truth and belief. The hosts argue that if we accept certain cosmological ideas, they impact the feasibility of aligning epistemic and instrumental rationality. This leads to a discussion on the significance of faith in establishing these foundational beliefs about the universe, which can influence philosophical positions. The interplay of belief systems and cosmological understanding provides a compelling backdrop for exploring deeper philosophical questions.
Here we discuss fidesim and critical rationalism. Fideism has many definitions, but at least how we are thinking of it, it is the idea that something like faith has validity in the process of moving closer to truth through reason.
Our starting point is a paper written by prominent Popperian Joseph Agassi about how William Bartley, another critical rationalist philosopher closely associated with Popper, had a falling out with Popper after he accused Popper of being a fideist, which Popper apparently did not consider a compliment. But was Bartley perhaps correct?
Note: we decided to cover this paper before we even realized it was about fideism which -- by pure dumb luck -- happened to be part of the topic of our last episode (#106: Karl Popper and God) where Bruce declared himself a Fideist. As such, episode #106 is not required listening, but you might find Popper's views on God and his views on epistemological fideism an interestingly interplay.
