Re: The Problem with Atheism
Reply #395 –
Wikipedia, however, is… Well, if you don't know, Sparta, I wouldn't tell you.
————————————————
@ersi: Falsifiability was Popper's repudiation of the Vienna Circle's logical-positivism…
In short, they claimed that scientific theories were supported by empirical evidence via their predictions. A correct prediction was evidence that the theory was true… And also that propositions not so connected were simply nonsensical verbiage; e.g., all of metaphysics…
But there are logical problems with induction that mock scientific theories thus conceived unmercifully! To wit: That Caesar crossed the Rubicon is evidence that all crows are black; as is the fact that I once lost a toe-nail and it grew back. So, something is wrong with this conception…
Popper thought to remedy this by substituting well-, critically- or seriously-tested; in jargon-less words, the predictions of a scientific theory had to be such that they could be false, and if they passed some unspecified number of such tests then they were (sort-of) okay — to believe. (see here)
You likely see the problem Popper elided… (Anyone else?)