- #1
Julius Ceasar
- 60
- 10
- TL;DR Summary
- From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I see falsification depends on a demonstrated false observation
wiki
(A statement, hypothesis, or theory is falsifiable if it can be demonstrated to be false by observation.)
But the following seems to imply that unless a statement is demonstrated false it is unscientific.
wiki
(The concept was introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper. He saw falsifiability as the logical part and the cornerstone of his scientific epistemology, which sets the limits of scientific inquiry. He proposed that statements and theories that are not falsifiable are unscientific. Declaring an unfalsifiable theory to be scientific would then be pseudoscience.)
I don't think this is what Popper meant but this is----- how it reads, What is he proposing and how should it read?
Perhaps he proposed that statements and theories must apply rigorous and skeptical observations to be truly scientific but there is always the problem of induction that some observation has not been accounted for, ala 'all swans are white', then finding black swans.
I see the benefit of trying to falsify statements and theories but it is pretty useless if you can't check everything.
wiki
(A statement, hypothesis, or theory is falsifiable if it can be demonstrated to be false by observation.)
But the following seems to imply that unless a statement is demonstrated false it is unscientific.
wiki
(The concept was introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper. He saw falsifiability as the logical part and the cornerstone of his scientific epistemology, which sets the limits of scientific inquiry. He proposed that statements and theories that are not falsifiable are unscientific. Declaring an unfalsifiable theory to be scientific would then be pseudoscience.)
I don't think this is what Popper meant but this is----- how it reads, What is he proposing and how should it read?
Perhaps he proposed that statements and theories must apply rigorous and skeptical observations to be truly scientific but there is always the problem of induction that some observation has not been accounted for, ala 'all swans are white', then finding black swans.
I see the benefit of trying to falsify statements and theories but it is pretty useless if you can't check everything.
Last edited by a moderator: