The question of how and where to draw boundaries around science remains a controversial issue even today. Since the emergence of modern science in the 16th and 17th centuries, many philosophers and thinkers have attempted to set clear boundaries or criteria that separated it from other forms of knowledge. However, no consensus on this issue has been reached so far. This question is known as a "boundary problem" in philosophy and it has always been of the greatest importance to science itself, because it gives rise to many other problems concerning the general status of science in modern society . For example, if we cannot draw a clear line between science and myths, how can we judge the superiority of the former over the latter? Both Popper and Woolf addressed this issue in their works, but do so in different ways and for different purposes. . To be more precise, Popper tried to establish a clear line that demarcated science from other forms of knowledge, on the contrary, Woolf tried to blur this line. The roots of Popper's problem stem from his dissatisfaction with the theories that gained popularity at the time. these eras, namely Marx's theory of history, Freud's psychoanalysis and Alfred Adler's individual psychology. The source of his discontent lay in his doubts about the truly scientific status of these theories. And the most interesting things start here. Popper challenged these theories from completely different angles for the time. For Popper, the established and widely recognized principles of scientific theories, such as the principles of verification and observation, were of little use because they could be easily manipulated. All three theories mentioned satisfied these principles and had e...... middle of article ......o what is the main conclusion I came to after reading two authors? The question is twofold: science should not be confused with other forms of knowledge, but that does not mean that other forms of knowledge, such as imagination, are unimportant in our quest for truth. Ralph Waldo Emerson once said, “Science does not know its debt to imagination.” I completely agree with this, the first should always go hand in hand with the second. Works Cited Popper, Karl. “Science as falsification”. Conjectures and Refutations, London: Routledge and Keagan Paul, 1963, pp. 33-39; by Theodore Schick, ed., Readings in the Philosophy of Science, Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company, 2000, pp. 9-13.Woolf, Virginia. “Shakespeare’s sister”. A World of Ideas: Essential Reading for Academic Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2010. 837-854.