PDA

View Full Version : Defending Karl Popper

gh9801
11-22-2005, 10:10 PM
Given two theories, one highly corroborrated and one not. Both have not been falsified.

Critics: It is impossible to choose a superior theory from these two because neither will ever be confirmed and both have not been falsified.

Are there any ways to defend Popper against this argument?
BluffTHIS!
11-22-2005, 10:41 PM
There is a difference between not being falsified, and being incapable of being falsified, which is the basis of Popper's standard for determining whether something is science or not.
11-23-2005, 01:37 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Given two theories, one highly corroborrated and one not. Both have not been falsified.

Critics: It is impossible to choose a superior theory from these two because neither will ever be confirmed and both have not been falsified.

Are there any ways to defend Popper against this argument?

[/ QUOTE ]

But really now, shouldn't you be doing your own homework?
benkahuna
11-23-2005, 02:40 AM
I hope he does do his homework here. I'd be downright tickled with the results if he uses what a lot of people could say in response.
Rduke55
11-23-2005, 11:57 AM
[ QUOTE ]
There is a difference between not being falsified, and being incapable of being falsified, which is the basis of Popper's standard for determining whether something is science or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thread over.