From Alex Berezow at American Council on Science and Health:
In other words, only one out of 70 papers fully met Popper’s criteria of falsification. This suggests that while Popper’s idea of falsification is a good one, it is far too difficult for scientists to implement regularly in practice. Science plods along just fine without adhering to Popper’s overly burdensome guidelines.
Though he would surely dispute Dr. Hansson’s conclusion that falsification has been falsified, hopefully Popper would have at least found it amusingly ironic.More.
Berezow is (perhaps ironically) missing the point here, of course. Falsification is a standard, adherence to which need not be perfect. But it provides a basis for discussion of claims.
Among the people to whom that matters are taxpayers in societies that support science.
If I (O’Leary for News) pay taxes to support “science,” does that mean I am obliged to pay for witchcraft studies or theories that the White House is hiding space aliens? Vs. the Canadarm of the space shuttles or destroying polio? If so, I would sure want to know why.
Note: Polio can be destroyed the way smallpox was because all vectors are human.
See also: The war on falsifiability
Follow UD News at Twitter!
5 Replies to “Popper wrong on falsification?”
I think a government study of the Illuminati is called for.
The Illuminati are the government and they want to reveal Trumps tax returns, which is a lose-lose proposition for him because the slathering media will take advantage of the public’s ignorance of a rich man’s real tax return.
He gets my vote for simply not being fool enough to fall for it. BwaaaHahahahahahaaaa!
But then seriously, I should have some say so in how and what my tax dollars are spent on. I am sorry, I really am sorry that most of the media and whatever facts they bring to bear I do not trust unless it comes from MY side.
50 years or so of leftist bias has made me very cynical and very sad for my country, but I don’t belong here anyways.
Speaking of Trump. Every day my cable company has a negative article on Trump, never a positive article on Trump, and never anything negative about Hilary.
mung @4 They have to keep the gravy train rolling.