(Originally written November 3, 2006 in Book 8)
What is this thing called science?
A. Chalmers
Ch. 5
Falsifiability as a criterion for theories
Falsifications sees science as a set of hypotheses that are proposed with the aim of describing one aspect of the world.
Any hypothesis must be falsifiable.
To be falsifiable a theory must have a logically possible observation statement(s) that is inconsistent with it and if any of those observations come true the hypothesis is falsified.
Falsifiability is a prerequisite to a law or theory having the ability to be informative.
Falsifiability is key in science. "If a theory is to have informative content it must run the risk of being falsified" (Chalmers, 65).
Degree of falsifiability, clarity and precision
The more falsifiable a theory is the better.
Scientific theories should be wide ranged and over arching.
More falsifiable theories should be preferred over less falsifiable ones, but once a theory has been falsified it must be ruthlessly rejected.
Bold conjectures are to be preferred over irrelevant truisms.
Refutations of theories is a good thing because we learn from our mistakes. By "finding that our conjecture was false we shall have learnt much about the truth, and shall have gotten nearer to the truth" (Chalmers, 66-67).
Falsificationism demands concise, articulate theories. Vagueness and ambiguity is kicked out by falsificationism.
Falsificationism and progress:
1. Science begins with problems
2. Falsifiable hypotheses are proposed to solve the problems
3. Conjectures are criticized and tested
4. Elimination of falsified conjectures
5. Surviving conjectures are tested again, more vigorously
6. A problem is solved and a new problem emerges
(Repeat)
Problems come from straightforward observations. But they come only in a given theory.
No comments:
Post a Comment