Abstract
This chapter considers Ian C. Jarvie’s specific contribution to the study of some of Popper’s ideas in The Poverty of Historicism. Jarvie acknowledges the difficulty of writing about Popper’s view of the differences between the natural and the social sciences, because Popper never addresses the critique of anti-naturalistic doctrines. He offers instead a critique of methodological essentialism and an apology of a certain nominalism. Popper shares these two ideas with Friedrich A. Hayek; however, Popper minimizes Hayek’s subjectivism of the social sciences. This chapter argues that the difference in method is greater than it seems and that something akin to a Republic of Letters should be built alongside the Republic of Science, without ignoring the inherent faults in these republics that Jarvie underlines.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
