>The vast majority of the academic work produced by people who employ this "philosophy of science" is in-falsifiable and never cited. Number of citations do no

>The vast majority of the academic work produced by people who employ this "philosophy of science" is in-falsifiable and never cited. Number of citations do not indicate or validate the worthiness of a piece of work. Do you not realise the irony of saying that the works questioning the philosophy of science are unfalsifiable? You seem to hold that the idea of falsifiablity is sacred and that any questioning of it should be thrown away because it's unfalsifiable. It's tautological.