Changes

{{main|Falsifiability}}

{{main|Falsifiability}}

[[Falsifiability]] is a frequently used criterion in determining whether a particular hypothesis is [[science|scientific]] or conjecture.  A hypothesis is considered falsifiable if it ''could'' be proven wrong by experiment or observation. This concept falls under the category of [[Philosophy of Science]] and is a useful tool in determining the scientific validity of a hypothesis, although not a complete test in and of itself.

[[Falsifiability]] is a frequently used criterion in determining whether a particular hypothesis is [[science|scientific]] or conjecture.  A hypothesis is considered falsifiable if it is logically ''possible'' that it could be proven wrong by experiment or observation. This does not mean that the test or observation must be feasible or logistically possible with our current technology, simply that a logically consistent test or observation must be conceivable.

 

 

This concept falls under the category of [[Philosophy of Science]] and is a useful tool in determining the scientific validity of a hypothesis, although not a complete test in and of itself.

For instance, the proposition "Gravity accelerates objects towards the Earth at 32 ft/s²" can be tested by dropping an object in Earth's gravitational field.  If we did this and it didn't fall, or it fell at a different speed, we would know that the proposition is false.  

For instance, the proposition "Gravity accelerates objects towards the Earth at 32 ft/s²" can be tested by dropping an object in Earth's gravitational field.  If we did this and it didn't fall, or it fell at a different speed, we would know that the proposition is false.  

However, other propositions are not testable.  For instance, "There is an invisible unicorn in my room."  Without a way to test whether this proposition is true or not (it's invisible), the hypothesis can not rise above conjecture.

However, other propositions are not testable.  For instance, "There is an invisible pink unicorn in my room."  While the proposition that the unicorn is in the room is testable (by methods other than sight) because said unicorn is invisible, it is impossible to detect colour, and the hypothesis that said unicorn is pink can not rise above conjecture.

 

It is important to realize that just because a proposition is ''unfalsifiable'' does not mean it is ''false.''  There ''could'' be an invisible unicorn in my room.  But there could also not be.  

In the same way, if a person claims that six weeks ago they drank three glasses of water for the day, there is no way that particular claim can possibly be shown to be false (barring the existence of witnesses).  It is therefore not even ''possible'' to prove his claim to be wrong, so the claim is said to be ''unfalsifiable'', and therefore not scientifically valid.

In the same way, if a person claims that six weeks ago they drank three glasses of water for the day, there is no way that particular claim can possibly be shown to be false (barring the existence of witnesses).  It is therefore not even ''possible'' to prove his claim to be wrong, so the claim is said to be ''unfalsifiable'', and therefore not scientifically valid.