[PREV - WILD_LOTTERY]    [TOP]

FALSE_KARL

                                               May 6, 2008

                                               BLACK_SWAN

   "Karl Popper was once asked whether one
   'could falsify falsification' (in other
   words, if one could be skeptical about
   skepticism).  His answer was that he                   FALSIES
   threw students out of his lectures for
   asking far more intelligent questions
   than that one."  -- p. 193


It may not be a counter-argument
against falsification to say that          But actually, I'm not sure that
it's not falsifiable; but if so,           you can't falsify falsification.
that would show that on it's own           You would just need to find cases
terms the doctrine of falsifiability       where the "falsifiability"
is not a scientific doctrine.              criterion rejects a hypothesis
                                           that strikes us a scientific.
That automatically raises the question
of what else we might consider to be              If that seems ad hoc,
correct, true, and/or valuable which              well, where else do
is nevertheless not "scientific".                 you think principles
                                                  like this come from?
It takes some of the wind out of the
sails of the accusation "but that is              We infer them from actual
not falsifiable!"                                 cases; we design them to
                                                  systematize existing practice.

                                                        Karl Popper did
                                                        not invent the
                                                        scientific method.

                                                        (And neither did
                                                        Peirce or Mills.)



--------
[NEXT - SCALING_SIMILARITY]