3 ms·
Math is itself indeed not science. It is the language of science. It follows different rules than empirical sciences. But note that word "empirical" there; Popp
by mcv 3y ago
Math is itself indeed not science. It is the language of science. It follows different rules than empirical sciences. But note that word "empirical" there; Popper was really only talking about empirical science, and according to him, that was the only real science. You could argue that there are non-empirical sciences.
Another problem with Popper is probably that outside of physics and chemistry, there are a lot of less exact sciences where predictions and refutations of a theory are never that clear cut. Like his issues with the theory of evolution.
Ultimately, I guess science is also simply "getting to stuff that works by trial and error".
- ukj 3y agoOk… I reject your reality and substitute my own. In this reality I don’t have to do the mental gymnastics where the formal *sciences* aren’t sciences. In this reality there is at least one unfalsifiable (not even in principle) true claim: the halting problem This renders falsifiability as a modal criterion. Useful in some scientific contexts - useless in others.