Sentence examples for criterion of falsifiability from inspiring English sources

In a piquant way, Wootton, while making little of Popper's criterion of falsifiability, makes it up to him by borrowing a criterion from his political philosophy.

Even the criterion of falsifiability, for example, is still a useful benchmark for distinguishing science and pseudoscience, as a first approximation.

Verikukis argues that the charges of unfalsifiability against Marxism have rarely been addressed, except in the wider arena of debunking the criterion of falsifiability itself (get rid of that, and the anti-Marxist critique collapses like a house of cards, requiring a complete refit elsewhere).

Asma's own counterexample inadvertently shows this: the "cleverness" of astrologers in cherry-picking what counts as a confirmation of their theory, is hardly a problem for the criterion of falsifiability, but rather a nice illustration of Popper's basic insight: the bad habit of creative fudging and finagling with empirical data ultimately makes a theory impervious to refutation.

This criterion of "falsifiability" was originally formulated by Karl Popper, perhaps the most influential philosopher of science of the 20th century, and, at first blush, it seems like a good one — it nicely rules out the spooky claims of pseudoscientists and snake oil salesmen.

Popper's method of demarcation consists essentially of the single criterion of falsifiability (although some authors have wanted to combine it with the additional criteria that tests are actually performed and their outcomes respected, see Section 4.2).

Popper's original anti-metaphysics barrier was set by the criterion of empirical falsifiability of scientific statements, e.g., the formal, logical possibility of their relation to basic statements, linked to experience, that can prove them false deductively through the application of a modus tollens argument (Popper 1935/1951).

They also have turned in force to the views of Karl Popper, who explained the theoretical virtue of simplicity in terms of falsifiability: all genuine scientific theories are falsifiable, and the simpler a theory is (other things equal), the more readily it can be falsified.

Popper (1965, 1968) championed falsifiability as a criterion of demarcation that is more appropriate than verifiability as a criterion of meaningfulness, on the ground that what we need is a basis for distinguishing scientific from nonscientific statements, where the latter can still be meaningful, even when they are not scientific.

Thus, while advocating falsifiability as the criterion of demarcation for science, Popper explicitly allows for the fact that in practice a single conflicting or counter-instance is never sufficient methodologically to falsify a theory, and that scientific theories are often retained even though much of the available evidence conflicts with them, or is anomalous with respect to them.

In this they agree that Popper is wrong that falsifiability is the sole criterion of the scientific.