Quote:
|
Originally Posted by beskeptical
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by russ_watters
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jerry Jensen
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by beskeptical
I bring this up to ask, what is it that can't be falsified? .
|
One often hears that man first learned how to use fire by observing lighting strikes and/or tinkering around volcanoes. As trivial as it sounds, this statement cannot be tested or verified and is scientifically irrelevant. It should not be included in scientific texts without emphasizing the point that this is speculation or hypothesis, not a supportable theory. |
Not a bad example, but I'd need to see a specific instance of that to say if you are right or wrong. All that's needed are the words "scientists speculate that...." and the problem disappears. |
All that is needed is the criteria to measure the outcome by. |
Fair enough, but in the absence of the crieria, they'd need to use the disclaimer.
Quote:
|
Theories that arise strictly from a mathematical answer to a physical question would then be less exposed to falsifiability if there is no way to test the theory.
|
Minor point of clarity - some predictions may not be testable today, with existing technology, but may be testable in the future, with better technology. Such predictions
are falsifiable. Its not a requirement that a theory be falsifiable
now - in fact, its almost a requirement that some of its predictions
not be immediately falsifiable (otherwise, the theory makes no actual predictions).