Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: + +
Can we brand as pseudoscience such theories as evolution and global warming?
A proposition or theory is '''falsifiable''' if it is hypothetically possible for a test or observation to prove it false, regardless of the accuracy of the proposition.<ref>[http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O87-falsifiability.html Definition] A Dictionary of Psychology, Andrew M. Colman, via encyclopedia.com</ref> A proposal or theory that can never be shown to be false is not falsifiable.
A proposition or theory is '''falsifiable''' if it is hypothetically possible for a test or observation to prove it false, regardless of the accuracy of the proposition.<ref>[http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O87-falsifiability.html Definition] A Dictionary of Psychology, Andrew M. Colman, via encyclopedia.com</ref> A proposal or theory that can never be shown to be false is not falsifiable.
To be considered [[scientific]], a [[hypothesis]] must be "[[falsifiable]]", i.e., capable of being proven false. If no one, not even the supporters of the hypothesis, can think of a way the hypothesis might be proven false, then most scientists would agree that it is not part of science (see [[pseudoscience]]). However, the [[history of science]] is full of examples whereby supporters of various theories refused to consider the prospect that someone might prove them wrong. Supporters of the [[evolution]] and [[global warming]] theories are like this.
For example, the suggestion that I would be very happy if I were ten years younger is not falsifiable, because it is impossible to test the hypothesis by making myself ten years younger and seeing how I feel.
For example, the suggestion that I would be very happy if I were ten years younger is not falsifiable, because it is impossible to test the hypothesis by making myself ten years younger and seeing how I feel.