3 ms·

An argument invoking an statement that is not falsifiable is immediately invalid. At least in sane societies, so help us God! EDIT: correction of "unprovable"

An argument invoking an statement that is not falsifiable is immediately invalid. At least in sane societies, so help us God! EDIT: correction of "unprovable" to "not falsifiable"

pavel_lishin 9y ago
But most statements are unprovable. How do you prove that your plan to stabilize Latin America will work?
- std_throwaway 9y ago
  God told me so in a dream. Isn't that enough? Maybe we better need some logic and work our way towards a solution. Having a solid base with well tested theories is a good start. It won't ever be fully bulletproof, sure. There is only one final way to find out. Try it. Maybe we should choose a plan that doesn't involve creating a better world only in the so-called "afterlife".
vkou 9y ago
"Jesus Christ will return to the Earth soon" is falsifiable. At least, it's as falsifiable as "Fourty years of exposure to Flouride in the drinking water will turn our children into communists." "A bunch of people saying that Jesus Christ will return to the Earth soon" is also falsifiable.
- std_throwaway 9y ago
  Who or what is a "Jesus Christ? How do you determine that something or somebody is a "Jesus Christ"? What does "return to Earth" mean? Does it mean physically in a human body or is mentally felt by his followers enough? Define "soon". The statement "Fourty years of exposure to Flouride in the drinking water will turn our children into communists." is much better defined except for the "communists" part. But we could define a "communist test". If the children exposed to forty years of Fluoride in the drinking water fail pass the "communist" test it is clearly false. Still, within the short time of the debate you won't find any meaningful answer to these questions thus limiting their utility severely.
  - vkou 9y ago
    These are great criticisms, but they can be levied against all sorts of claims about abstract concepts (Freedom, justice, markets, etc.) Different theologians (Or ethicists) will have different, contradictory answers for these questions, but that doesn't mean that discussing ethics is a waste of time, or that a claim like "China restricts its citizens freedom" is unfalsifiable. I believe that discussing the inevitable return of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (In the next 60 years) to be a waste of time, but that's because I believe the probability of his return, and the subsequent apocalypse of unbelievers, is zero. Unfrotunately, I won't be vindicated in this belief until 2077.
throwawayknecht 9y ago
The counter to a move like this is trivial, but they are banking on surprise and that you won't have any Popper to actually pull it off in your evidence on-hand. (I haven't paid attention to policy debate in 15 years and now I wonder what kind of impact smartphones have had, or could have assuming they're not currently allowed.)

An argument invoking an statement that is not falsifiable is immediately invalid. At least in sane societies, so help us God! EDIT: correction of "unprovable" to "not falsifiable"

pavel_lishin 9y ago

But most statements are unprovable. How do you prove that your plan to stabilize Latin America will work?

std_throwaway 9y ago
God told me so in a dream. Isn't that enough? Maybe we better need some logic and work our way towards a solution. Having a solid base with well tested theories is a good start. It won't ever be fully bulletproof, sure. There is only one final way to find out. Try it. Maybe we should choose a plan that doesn't involve creating a better world only in the so-called "afterlife".

vkou 9y ago

"Jesus Christ will return to the Earth soon" is falsifiable. At least, it's as falsifiable as "Fourty years of exposure to Flouride in the drinking water will turn our children into communists." "A bunch of people saying that Jesus Christ will return to the Earth soon" is also falsifiable.

std_throwaway 9y ago
Who or what is a "Jesus Christ? How do you determine that something or somebody is a "Jesus Christ"? What does "return to Earth" mean? Does it mean physically in a human body or is mentally felt by his followers enough? Define "soon". The statement "Fourty years of exposure to Flouride in the drinking water will turn our children into communists." is much better defined except for the "communists" part. But we could define a "communist test". If the children exposed to forty years of Fluoride in the drinking water fail pass the "communist" test it is clearly false. Still, within the short time of the debate you won't find any meaningful answer to these questions thus limiting their utility severely.
- vkou 9y ago
  These are great criticisms, but they can be levied against all sorts of claims about abstract concepts (Freedom, justice, markets, etc.) Different theologians (Or ethicists) will have different, contradictory answers for these questions, but that doesn't mean that discussing ethics is a waste of time, or that a claim like "China restricts its citizens freedom" is unfalsifiable. I believe that discussing the inevitable return of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (In the next 60 years) to be a waste of time, but that's because I believe the probability of his return, and the subsequent apocalypse of unbelievers, is zero. Unfrotunately, I won't be vindicated in this belief until 2077.

throwawayknecht 9y ago

The counter to a move like this is trivial, but they are banking on surprise and that you won't have any Popper to actually pull it off in your evidence on-hand. (I haven't paid attention to policy debate in 15 years and now I wonder what kind of impact smartphones have had, or could have assuming they're not currently allowed.)