本文旨在探討卡爾﹒巴柏的客觀知識論及其在教育上的涵義。巴柏不滿傳統對知識的看法，即主張歸納法是科學的穩當方法；相反的，他認為人有犯錯的可能性，所以每一項科學假設都有錯誤的可能性，即可否證性，因此他的客觀知識論是一種演化的認識論，對真理的立場是「真理逼近說」，不同以往傳統哲學「探求確定性」的真理觀。 巴柏藉由休姆的問題出發，即否定歸納法是探求科學理論的確當方法；再由康德的問題，即劃界問題，指陳否證法是區分科學和偽科學的基準。由此而論證其客觀知識（第三世界）是獨立乎任何認識者的獨立自主的世界。至於教育的啟示有二：（一）營造具自由、批判與鼓勵的學習環境；（二）引介科學史中矛盾狀況的觀念。

　　　　　This paper aims at explicating Karl Popper's "objective knowledge" theory. Popper rejected the traditional view of knowledge which maintained that induction was the sound method to construct scientific theories. On the contrary, he insisted that man is fallible, and therefore each item of scientific hypothesis has the possibility of fallibility, that is, "falsifiability". Form this, Popper's "objective knowledge" by its very nature is a kind of "evolutionary epistemology", and his view of truth is "search for verisimilitude" rather than "the quest for certainty". Popper claimed that the "objective knowledge" (the third world) s "knowledge without a knowing subject", an autonomous world, by means of stating the "Hume's problem" of disputing the legitimate status of induction as the sound scientific method, and the "Kant's problem" of demarcating the science and false science. As to its implications for education, there are two points worth advocating, and they are: (1)creating a free, critical and supportive learning environment; (2)introducing the idea of the conflict cases in the historical development of science.