Abstract

The paper deals with two mistakes ascribed to Popper’s theory of verisimilitude. The first is the well known critique of Popper’s qualitative definition of verisimilitude produced independently by D. Miller and P. Tichý which argues that that definition is false. The second is the claim that due to Popper’s theory of verisimilitude and his theory of corroboration inductive and justificatory elements enter his theory of science. This accusation was raised e. g. by I. Lakatos and J. Watkins. The paper tries to show that while the first critique is true, the second is false.