4 ms·
> pseudo-scientific theories, like astrology and Freudian psychoanalysis Kind of a bold take from SciAm.
by jimhefferon 8y ago
> pseudo-scientific theories, like astrology and Freudian psychoanalysis
Kind of a bold take from SciAm.
- Buldak 8y agoI gather Popper criticized those theories himself, so you could read this as simply a description of his arguments, rather than an endorsement.
- TangoTrotFox 8y agoNo, it's not. You're inappropriately cutting off the sentence: "He is best-known for the principle of falsification, a means of distinguishing pseudo-scientific theories, like astrology and Freudian psychoanalysis, from genuine ones, like quantum mechanics and general relativity." Falsification is critical to 'real' science, as otherwise the value of what is said rests solely on how it is said rather than what is said. For instance I could say that there's an invisible massless gremlin resting on your shoulder, but you can't tell it's there as it only interacts with other invisible massless gremlins and gravity. Obviously nobody would believe this, because it sounds absurd. But that's not why you shouldn't believe it. The reason you shouldn't believe it is believe it is because it's not falsifiable. You're left trying to prove that there is no invisible massless gremlin on your shoulder, which is something you cannot do. Predictiveness is of course also critical, but predictions that cannot be falsified are irrelevant. For instance 100 wrong astrology predictions in a row does not falsify astrology. It just means 100 predictions ended up being not true for some individual or another. But because we can happily ignore the times when predictions of astrology are wrong means you ought also be happy to ignore all of the times that it's right - as it's saying nothing where accuracy matters.