Abstract

The article compares the work of Peirce and Popper. It focuses on issues in epistemology and philosophy of science, especially Peirce's claims that abduction is a matter of logic, and that induction can be given a weak form of justification. Peirce's and Popper's accounts of the nature of truth and its role in scientific inquiry are compared, and difficulties are diagnosed in both their attempts to reconcile fallibilism with a definition of truth which