Intelligent Design News Philosophy Science

Neuroskeptic: The war on falsifiability suggests science is broken?

Spread the love


Science is the use of observation to guide thinking about the world to understand it. This grand, idealistic, with-a-big-S Science is not broken. However, much of the actual, concrete with-a-small-s science, i.e. the activity of scientists today, is not good Science. Some aspects of how modern science works go against the principles of Science.

For instance, one of the key theories of how Science ought to work is Karl Popper‘s notion of falsifiability. Popper argued that for a theory to be considered scientific, it had to be falsifiable. That is, a theory should make predictions that could be tested and, potentially, proven wrong. An unfalsifiable theory is just not science. A falsifiable theory might be right or wrong – to find out, we should design experiments that would produce contrary evidence if it is wrong. If it survives our best attempts at disproof, a theory can be considered probably true.

So that’s the ideal. Popper’s vision is of Science as a self-correcting enterprise. But the way science is performed today is often at odds with this view. I’ll outline three problems: … More.

We would have said “broken down,” rather than “broken.” Bad management wrecks good equipment

2 Replies to “Neuroskeptic: The war on falsifiability suggests science is broken?

  1. 1
    Robert Byers says:

    I think this science thing is really just about the intelligence of people to figure things out in nature. The scientific methodology is just a tool. Yet it still comes down to human smarts and so error and carelessness is a dominat theme in science as in everything else.
    there is no science. jUst people thinking and doing a better or worse job then someone e;lse or some common mean of accuracy.

  2. 2

Leave a Reply