加载中...
Skip to main content

Questions tagged [falsifiability]

The falsifiability of a hypothesis or statement, i.e. the inherent possibility of making observations that can prove the hypothesis wrong.

Filter by
Sorted by
Tagged with
4 votes
11 answers
1k views

I understand (or thought I understood) Popper's falsification principle. For a statement to be meaningful it has to be falsifiable. That I can get on board with. But then I looked at it in regards to ...
humespork's user avatar
7 votes
5 answers
1k views

From my understanding of the Duhem-Quine thesis, it seems that theories can’t be refuted Popper-style. But then how can one make sure that some theory can’t work as an explanation for a phenomenon?
George Jostar's user avatar
0 votes
1 answer
98 views

Below is the definition, sourced from Wikipedia, empasis mine: Thornton says that basic statements are statements that correspond to particular "observation-reports". He then gives Popper's ...
Antonios Sarikas's user avatar
0 votes
1 answer
109 views

I was watching Ian Shapiro's account of Bentham's classical Utilitarianism. Here is an abridged version of a discusion between him and his students: Prof: Now, I'm going to make five points about ...
More Anonymous's user avatar
1 vote
3 answers
548 views

This answer to Does asking counterfactual questions about the context/conditions of one's birth presuppose the existence of souls? proposed an alternative view: Alternative: Reductive physicalism ...
user avatar
-4 votes
2 answers
169 views

Suppose that one asked you to consider the plausibility of a functioning iPhone 14 forming by complete chance (i.e. without design). As far as I understand, this is actually possible, according to ...
Syed's user avatar
  • 10.4k
4 votes
2 answers
477 views

A lot of work has been done in recent years regarding black holes, especially in the area of thermodynamics. However this raises in me a philosophical concern: since not even light can escape a black ...
Victor Bergman's user avatar
1 vote
5 answers
405 views

This question stems from a comment by @Conifold: "Falsifiability" is a wrong standard that is no longer used (if it ever was) because any theory can be "saved" by suitable ...
Syed's user avatar
  • 10.4k
4 votes
11 answers
1k views

From Wikipedia: Physical causal closure is a metaphysical theory about the nature of causation in the physical realm with significant ramifications in the study of metaphysics and the mind. In a ...
user avatar
4 votes
3 answers
133 views

In science, falsifiability of a theory is considered a good thing because as per Popper if a empirical evidence can show that a theory is false, then the theory can be replaced by another which has ...
Batperson's user avatar
  • 1,132
1 vote
1 answer
68 views

I have sometimes heard people say that there is merit in formulating claims that are “falsifiable”. I can imagine that “falsifiable” means “can be falsified”, and “falsified” means “judged, determined,...
Julius Hamilton's user avatar
6 votes
7 answers
3k views

I've previously asked Is epiphenomenalism falsifiable?, which was well-received, so I’d like to explore a follow-up. Are there any versions of mind-body dualism that make testable predictions, thus ...
user avatar
4 votes
6 answers
2k views

In the debate on the nature of consciousness, especially concerning views like epiphenomenalism, can we design experiments to test whether consciousness, regardless of its underlying nature, has ...
user avatar
2 votes
0 answers
68 views

As science pursues truth but is not independent of man, does the true nature of society, especially its economic base, bear on currently unfalisfiable physical theories? Horkheimer thinks that there ...
user avatar
3 votes
1 answer
162 views

I am referring here not to falsification as a tool used to judge if something is good science, but rather to judge the meaning of statements such as "God exists". Suppose that Flew's parable ...
bbqribs's user avatar
  • 31

15 30 50 per page
1
2 3 4 5
7