Falsification

Falsification

1. The falsification principle: for any theory to be meaningful the person proposing it must be able to show how, the theory could be falsified

   • Karl Popper - criticised Astrologers because "by making their interpretations and prophecies vague they were able to explain away anything that might have been a refutation of theory"
     • Popper compared Einstein's theory of gravity with astrology. Einstein's theory is scientific because it was potentially falsifiable. Its truth or falsity could be tested against empirical observations e.g. by jumping in the air, gravity will always pull us back down. Whereas, Astrology is unscientific and cannot be proved true or false through empirical observations. How can you prove the movement of the stars affects your fate?
       • Falsification was a way to 'demarcate' (clearly set apart) scientific statements from other kinds of statements. Scientific statements supported by empirical data, other statements are not
     • Social theories such as Marxism and Freud’s psycho-analytical theory are not to be considered as scientifically meaningful because they fail to propose the conditions under which they might be falsified.

2. Flew, applies the principle of falsification to religious language. Flew argues that a proposition which does not rule out anything has no meaning. It is empty.

   • Religious statements like "God has a plan" are meaningless because the religious believer would never allow that such statements could ever be falsified. This is like the explorer who believes there is a gardener
     • Parable of the the two explorers who encounter a beautiful garden in the middle of the jungle. First explorer says there must be a gardener. Second explorer says there is not a gardener. Both explorers try to figure out whether the gardener exists e.g. using dogs to hunt for the gardener, putting up an electric fence to detect anyone entering the garden (empirical tests). First explorer still believes there is a gardener. Second explorer believes there is not a gardener as they could not empirically prove his existence
       • Flew argues that god dies a death by a thousand qualifications. When a religious believer is challenged about the existence of god, they modify their response to respond to the challenge. Believers end up modifying their statements so much that they do not match their original claims about god

3. :( Just because you cannot prove a statement true or false does not mean it's meaningless e.g. You can't prove that god's true but still meaningful to people. To religious believers, empirical data is not necessary.

4. :( Swinburne argued that scientific research is not always appropriate for some claims

5. :) It offers an alternative to the failed principle of verification

6. :) Falsification tries to provides a clear criteria for determining what is and is not to count as a meaningful use of language

7. :( Basil Mitchell, argues that falsification does not deny the commitments of religious believers. He tells the parable of the partisan and the stranger. The partisan trust the stranger even when the stranger does things against the resistance. This is because of his belief in the trustworthiness of the stranger. Therefore, Mitchell suggests that religious believers do accept evidence against their ideas e.g. the problem of evil and suggests that religious believers do accept this problem. But they also refuse to doubt their belief in god. Therefore, Mitchell argues religious language is meaningful

8. :( According to Wittengenstein and R M Hare the falsification principle fails to see that the meaning of language cannot to be determined by empirical criteria alone. It is used in different forms e.g. 'bliks' and language games