3 ms·
you're using falsifiability only as a negative, whereas most people will be familiar with Karl Popper and falsifiability as a necessary element of scientific di
by fsckboy 4y ago
you're using falsifiability only as a negative, whereas most people will be familiar with Karl Popper and falsifiability as a necessary element of scientific discourse and progress.
- peteradio 4y agoThey say that falsifiability is a best case scenario and base of the pyramid, as you move up you have to construct dynamic models of measurement to deduce even a probability of being true.
- lifeisstillgood 4y agoI see falsifiability as very much a positive and love me a bit of Karl Popper. I just think that for a empirical outcome to falsify a theory we both need to agree on the same theory. If your theory is there is a shadowy cabal of pedophiles secretly controlling wokeness to hold down good old boys from decent jobs and my theory is that factory production in China is cheaper so why keep the factory in Detroit, exactly which facts are going to help us? It took a lot to prove the Earth even spins, and orbits the sun. And yet if you had polled everyone in Europe or America from 1600 onwards, I am not sure when 50% of people would have said heliocentric, and do wonder when if ever the figure got above 95%. Somehow the figure that Brexit and Trump votes split not on age but on further education seems relevant here - that university teaches new mental models. But somehow I am dubious that has explanatory power.