Conjectures et réfutations. La croissance du savoir scientifique

This book made me think about how scientific theories are tested and discarded. I'm curious if the scientific community still sees falsifiability as the gold standard or if there are new debates.

Popper's use of history to illustrate scientific progress added a rich layer to the book. I wonder if others felt it helped clarify complex ideas or if it slowed down the flow.

Understanding the motivation behind emphasizing these ideas makes me appreciate the book more. Did Popper aim to challenge traditional views of science or address specific philosophical debates?