THE FIVE GREAT EPISTEMOLOGISTS

1. MARIO BUNGE (1919–Present)

He is an Argentine physicist, philosopher of science, and humanist; a defender of scientific realism and of
the exact philosophy. Perhaps it is one of the philosophers who has explored it more deeply
strategy and conceptual bases of scientific research.

Bunge is based on the formal logical approach of science, which is why he says that epistemology
I should study the formal conditions of validity of scientific theories and of the
technologies, and not spend efforts on purely psychosocial matters, which is the work of the
social sciences. Thus, Bunge defines science as a system of related theoretical laws.
deductively, so that the "scientific explanation" is a deductive process, where the
facts are explained by deducing from confirmed 'theoretical laws'.

For Bunge, the scientific method is the characteristic feature of both pure and
from the applied, therefore, it says that where there are no scientific methods there is no science. Thus,
It always makes clear that the boundary between science and non-science is the scientific method.

The most important publication of this epistemologist is his work: "Science, its
"method and its philosophy" in which he talks extensively about science and knowledge
scientific, which according to his words is: "a critical (fundamental), methodical knowledge,
verifiable, systematic, unified, orderly, universal, objective, communicable (through the
scientific language), rational, provisional and that explains and predicts facts through laws.” And
it also introduces the foundations of the scientific method.

2. KARL POPPER (1902–1994)

He was a philosopher, sociologist, and science theorist born in Austria and later became a citizen.
British.
He argued that science operated by falsification, not by induction. Popper was in a
context in which science was framed by positivism and empiricism, for this reason the
Popper's approach brought a shift in the conception of science at that time.
He proposed and defended the idea of a philosophy of science based on critical rationalism.
whose demarcation mechanism is falsificationism and its analytical logical tool the
deductivism. It articulates a dynamic where these elements act together and at the same time.
time, which manages to provide an explanation of the development of science and its methodology.
Popper developed this principle in The Logic of Scientific Research (1934) and with this
the publication of falascionism is born.

The main methodological contribution of Popper can be summarized as follows,

Although a theory cannot be verified, it can be falsified, that is, if the set of
favorable observations cannot prove the truth of a theory, a fact contrary to
she can show that the theory is false. From here, Popper establishes a criterion of
demarcation, distinguishing between science and non-science, concluding that a theory is
It grants the character of scientific if it is susceptible to being falsified; otherwise, it is not.
scientific. The theory is compared with results from experiments and data obtained from the
reality, as long as the theory is not falsified, it is provisionally accepted. If, on the contrary, it is
false, it must be abandoned because some of the principles on which it is based
it is false and replaced by an alternative theory. On the contrary, those that survive the
falsificationism will be corroborated and accepted. That is, in a few words, the criterion of
falsifiability raised by Popper against inductivism, verificalism, and probabilism.
The methodology provided by Popper was rapidly becoming dogma.
relentless search for falsification by scientists of their own theories in order to proceed to
the rejection of the same was something that did not occur in reality, as it is a fact that the theories
they were still being used even knowing they were falsified, as scientists did not have other options
more satisfactory. For this reason, as an alternative to the Popperian methodology, alternatives began to emerge
others like that of Kuhn.

THOMAS KUHN

He was an American historian and philosopher of science, known for his contribution to
change in the orientation of philosophy and scientific sociology in the 1960s.
Within the so-called historical school, Kuhn stands out, who in his work 'The Structure of
scientific revolutions" postulates a discontinuous conception of the development process
scientific. Kuhn has aimed for a superior approach to Popper with his theory of science
normal and scientific revolutions that alter that normal situation to return to a new one
normality. Being his work a perspective of knowledge totally different from that of his
era. Introduce the term paradigms which defined by Kuhn (1971) are 'the realizations
universally recognized scientific models that provide models for a certain period of time
solutions to a scientific community, however the breadth of the concept of paradigm
makes Kuhn admit the imprecision of the term and subsequently replace it with that of
disciplinary matrix" (disciplinary, because it refers to the common heritage of those who practice
a discipline, and matrix, because it refers to an ordered set of diverse elements
nature that requires additional specification): "A disciplinary matrix is composed of
paradigms, parts of paradigms that constitute a unity and function together.
Kuhn offers a theory of scientific progress in which normal science is the norm and the
revolution the exceptional. It indicates that the sciences progress cyclically starting with a
paradigm accepted by the scientific community and researched during a period of science
normal. Normal science tries to adapt theory to practice, but there may be certain
discrepancies. These discrepancies, if not resolved, become anomalies, which is the
recognition that in a certain way nature has violated the expectations induced by
the paradigm that governs normal science and if these anomalies accumulate, a
crisis that entails the fall of the old paradigm, and the emergence of a scientific revolution
in which the old paradigm is replaced by a new one that is incompatible with the previous one.
In this way, with the establishment of the new paradigm, three objectives are achieved.
important demands: 'It offers a solution to the scientific crisis; it provides a new
worldview; and finally offers an alternative research agenda on which the
scientists work." Therefore, for this author, science does not develop through the
accumulation of individual discoveries or inventions, but it forms as a process of
break with what was before.

The main novelty brought by this author is the concept of paradigm, and that
the main differences that separate him from the positivists are found in the substitution of the
individual by the scientific community and theory by the paradigm, as well as the elimination of the
linear accumulation of facts and theories through the normal and revolutionary phases in science.

IMRE LÁKATOS

He was a Hungarian mathematician and philosopher of science. This author holds a critical position.
both in front of Kuhn and Popper, it attempts to unite Popper's methodological interpretation with
the need raised by Kuhn to know the history and development of a science.
The 'Scientific Research Programs' (PIC) form the fundamental concept of the
methodological contribution of Lakatos. By scientific research program, he understands a
configuration of interconnected theories, is the succession of theories that are related to each other, of
so that some are generated from the previous ones, none of the theories are considered
totally autonomous so it's hard to dismiss individual theories without referencing the
research program as a whole. Lakatos divides the program into two parts: the
negative heuristic
"central core" or "firm core", the very basic statements that support the entire structure
not submitting to the process of falsification. Instead, positive heuristics constitute the
research content of the program, is easier to contrast and leads to formulation
from other concepts and theories described as 'the protective belt'. Therefore, the core
the central can survive refutations, while the rest is open to rejection or improvement. In
In other words, the central core refers to the set of central theories that gather the
most notable achievements in that field of knowledge. The protective belt comprises the
set of auxiliary hypotheses intended to be tested against the facts, with the
possibility of being refuted. In this way, Lakatos proposed a new theory that
described as 'sophisticated falsificationism' versus 'naive falsificationism' that considers
scientific theories in isolation and demands their rejection when they do not agree with the
reality.
For this author, science as a whole can be considered as a huge program of
research endowed with Popper's heuristic rule to design assumptions that have more
empirical content than its predecessors: "The history of science is the history of the
research programs, more than the history of theories.

5. WILHELM DILTHEY (1833-1911)

He was a philosopher, historian, sociologist, psychologist, and scholar of hermeneutics of origin

German.
He is the most prominent representative of contemporary German historicism. His vast
production includes studies on the problem of historical knowledge, and the
scientific research, historiographical works. But he mainly stood out for his contribution to the
social sciences with hermeneutics. He asserted that the study of human sciences implies
the interaction of personal experience, reflective understanding of experience, and a
expression of the spirit in gestures, words, and art. Dilthey reasoned that all knowledge must
to be analyzed in light of history; without this perspective, knowledge and understanding only
they can be partial

According to Dilthey we explain nature and understand psychic life. World of the
nature and the world of the spirit are, from a methodological point of view, worlds
different. The spirit world is the world created by man. In contrast, the world
nature is not a world created by man. It was said that we understand history because
we are the ones who make it. One only understands what one does. In this
meaning, the knowing subject participates in the production of its objects of knowledge
Dilthey is the first philosopher who tries to establish an autonomous method applicable to the study.
from the human sciences or sciences of the spirit: the hermeneutic method. Dilthey affirms that the
hermeneutics is not just an auxiliary technique for the study of the sciences of
spirit; it is a method distant from romantic interpretative arbitrariness and reduction
naturalist that allows to substantiate the universal validity of historical interpretation." More
forward to that research process will be called hermeneutic circle, it is called circle
because it wants to highlight the interdependence of the parts and it was the method that proposed this
philosopher to study social sciences.