82,891
edits
Falsification: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|philosophy|}}{{author|Karl Popper}}’s idea that, since the only way to rule out a scientific theory is with evidence that contradicts its predictions, it is a necessary condition of a bona fide scientific theory that it must be, in theory falsifi''able''. There must be evidence you ''could'' present that, if you could find it, ''would'' falsify the theory. | {{a|philosophy|}}{{author|Karl Popper}}’s idea that, since the only way to conclusively rule out a scientific theory is with evidence that contradicts its predictions, it is a necessary condition of a ''bona fide'' scientific theory that it must be, in theory falsifi''able''. There must be evidence you ''could'' present that, if you could find it, ''would'' falsify the theory. | ||
If it isn’t possible to formulate counter-evidence, even in theory, then the theory must consistent with any possible facts, does not limit any possible outcomes, makes no predictions, as no explanatory power, and is not science. | If it isn’t ''possible'' to formulate counter-evidence, even in theory, then the theory must consistent with any possible facts, does not limit any possible outcomes, makes no predictions, as no explanatory power, and is not science. | ||
Mathematical axioms, for example, are statements of logic and not fact. They can’t be falsified. There are no possible circumstances<ref>all right, pedants: at least, not within the [[paradigm]] of Euclidian geometry.</ref> in which ''2 + 2 ≠ 4''. | Mathematical axioms, for example, are statements of logic and not fact. They can’t be falsified. There are no possible circumstances<ref>all right, pedants: at least, not within the [[paradigm]] of Euclidian geometry.</ref> in which ''2 + 2 ≠ 4''. | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Far more controversial is the contention that [[evolution by natural selection]], for exactly the same reason, isn’t scientific either. | Far more controversial is the contention that [[evolution by natural selection]], for exactly the same reason, isn’t scientific either. | ||
===It’s a falsifiabilty defines science, it doesn’t describe how it works=== | |||
Falsifiability is a formal condition for a proposition to be scientific: there have to be circumstances in which it might not be true. But this is not to say science progresses ''by'' falsfication. Since is a profoundly social activity it proceeds by the normal rules of social interaction. | |||
===Kuhn vs. Popper celebrity death match=== | ===Kuhn vs. Popper celebrity death match=== | ||
{{verification and falsification}} | {{verification and falsification}} | ||