Philosophy Popper s hypocrisy, Popper s falsificationism

This is a problem in the philosophy of science, and the criterion for judging science is whether a theory can be logically falsified.

Note that it is logically possible to falsify it).

Let me give you an example. There are two theories.

Alas, it's raining tomorrow.

b, it may or may not rain tomorrow.

Which one A or B meets the requirements of a scientific theory? Yes a.

Why? Because to judge whether this proposition is true or not, you just have to see if it rains tomorrow. If it rains, then it's true, and if it doesn't, it's fake.

And b, whether it rains tomorrow or not, this proposition is always true. In fact, there is no prophecy or explanation of the facts.

In retrospect, then, science has the same form as proposition a, that is, it is logically falsifiable. If it is logically unfalsifiable (like proposition b, but whatever you say, it is all true, it is completely correct nonsense, and of course it is not science), then it cannot be science.

I explain it this way, can you understand? If you have any questions, you can contact me on the site.

Truth can be disproved by perjury, and if a truth is unblemished and unbreakable, it is not truth.

I am reminded of this sentence, God is omnipotent, so can God make a stone that God cannot move?

Can or can't prove that God is not omnipotent.

The truth can refer to this I hope it will help you.

Popper proposed a criterion for testing scientific theories – falsification. Whether a theory can be called a scientific theory depends on whether it has the possibility of being falsified.

Specifically, a scientific theory must be able to provide a falsifiable and foolish fact, and once the fact is proven to be false, the theory is false. And when it has not been possible to prove the error of this fact, then the theory is temporarily correct and is "improvised". Next to God.

This is a bit like the theory of evolution in the scientific sense, all kinds of human ideas and theories are as unstable and divergent as genetic variation, among which those that can stand the test are left behind, and those that cannot stand the test are eliminated. Human science is constantly improving, making great strides forward.

Therefore, unfalsifiable theories such as fortune telling, horoscopes, and religion have nothing to do with science.

Falsificationism puts an end to metaphysics, because metaphysics starts from an absolute axiom and then deduces other theories with perturbations, but absolute kilometers cannot be falsified.

Logical positivism is based on experience, using logic as a tool, reasoning, and using probability theory to revise conclusions. It argues that the scientific method is the only correct way to study human behavior, and therefore, although it is based on perceptual experience, it denies the positive role of perceptual cognition and is an out-and-out rationalism. From an empirical point of view, many researchers believe that the external objective world can be recognized and quantified.

Falsificationism holds that scientific theories are constantly being confirmed by limited, individual empirical facts, but individual empirical facts can falsify universal propositions. That is, if the conclusion reached on the basis of deductive reasoning is false, its premises must be false.

Theories can only be falsified, and they can be proved true without dissipation, which is the opinion of Karl Popper's fool. Hashijun ().

a.That's right. b.Mistake.

Correct Answer: a