Falsificationism is the idea that science advances by unjustified, exaggerated guesses followed by unstinting criticism. Only hypotheses capable of clashing with observation reports are allowed to count as scientific. Unfalsifiable theories are like to computer programs with no uninstall options that just clog up the computer’s precious storage space. Falsifiable theories, on the other hand, enhance our control over while expanding the richness of what we can say about the world.
Karl Popper is the founder of falsificationism. He was one of the 20th century’s most influential philosophers of science. Much of the discussion of what we now call the scientific method is due to his work on the idea of falsification of scientific theories. Falsification is an important criterion of a scientific theory.
Refer to falsification we can’t ignore another theory which is totally opposite to falsification. It is induction. The induction is derived from a series of empirical observations. It has some limitations as that the induction can only say connections in the past; no way verify if it is true or not in the future. Because the induction derived from empirical observations, it has no possibility to observe the things what will happen in the future. The second limitation is the logical mistake. Induction seems to be a collection of favourable examples by the scientist to prove their theory to be right. Obviously, it is not a good scientific approach to form theories and thus explain the world. In the induction, we can never contain all the examples can support our theory.
But falsification doesn’t have these problems. About the falsification we must care about 4 points:
◆Scientific work started from purposive information collection, theory precedes observation.
◆The construction of scientific theory originated from the creativity and observation of scientist, without objective method
◆Scientific theory can't be proved by individual observation, but it can be falsified
◆Scientific theory must has the possibility of being falsified
(Ⅰ)FASIFICATION ISA CRITERION FOR THEORIES
At first we should button the character of a scientific theory:
①explain and predict ②predict not forecast
③simplification of fact
④not a true ⑤falsifiable by fact
We get theories from the scientific researches, how can we define a research is a scientific research? There are three traditional factors about science:
◆The object of the research should be clearly explained.
◆The research object should observe and clearly measure in case of errors.
◆The conclusion should explain the research result clearly.
In a scientific theory the hypothesis should be falsifiable if there exists a logically possible observation statement or set of observation statements that are inconsistent with it. By ruling out a set of logically possible observation statements that a law or theory is informative. What we should pay attention to is if a statement is unfalsifiable, then world can have any properties whatsoever, and can behave in any way whatsoever, without conflicting with the statement.
(Ⅱ)A LOGICAL POINT IN FAVOUR OF FALSIFICATIONISM
We mentioned about the logical limitation about induction. Let us talk about the logical point in favour of falsificationism. According to falsificationism, some theories can be shown to be false by an appeal to the results of observation and experiment. It is impossible to arrive at universal laws and theories by logical deductions on observation alone.
But it is possible to perform logical deductions starting from singular observation statements as promises, to arrive at the falsity of universal laws and theories by logical deductions.
E.g.:
Premise: A raven, is not black was seen at place W at time T
Conclusion: Not all raven all black
(Valid)
The falsity of universal statements can be deduced from suitable singular statement. The falsificationist exploits logical point to full.
(Ⅲ)FASIFICATIONS &PROGRESS
“Science starts with Problems” Scientists proposed falsifiable hypotheses as solution to problem. But the Inductivist thinks “Science starts with observation” But I think there is no possibility for science to start with observation.
Since science starts with Problem is perfectly compatible with priority of theories over observation &observation statements. The falsificationist conception of the progress of Science . The growth of science is a conception that is a central one in the falsificationist account of science. In fact, the falsification is a circle to get a new problem and then settle it. The more problem we get and settle, the deeper we know about the world.
Now, show you an example how the circle work.
◆ 1. Problem:
Do bats detect obstacles with their eyes?
◆ 2. Hypothesis:
Bats are able to fly avoiding obstacles by using their eyes and can’t do so without the use of their eyes.
◆ 3. Test (experiment):
a) A sample bats is released into darked room containing obstacles and their ability to avoid the obstacles are measured in some way.
b) The same bats are now blindfolded and again release into the same room.
◆ 4. Eventual falsification:
The experiment found that bats avoid collisions just as efficiently as before.
Hypothesis has been falsified
◆ 5. Problem:
Now need a New conjecture/hypothesis &Return to step 1 (new problem)
◆ 1. Problem:
Do bats detect the obstacles with their ears?
◆ 2. Hypothesis:
Bats ears are involved in its ability to avoid obstacles.
◆ 3. Test (experiment):
Plugged the bats ears before releasing to the darkened room.
◆ 4. Eventual falsification:
The bats ability to avoid obstacles is considerably impaired.
Hypothesis has been Supported
Falsificationist now must try to make hypothesis more precise &to make it more readily falsifiable
◆ 5. Problem:
Now appears to reach a tentative solution to the problem
But the bats used in the experiment were not truly representative
A) Detects echoes not with its ears but region near ears
b) Perhaps different kinds of bats detect obstacles in very different ways.
(Ⅳ)DEGREE OF FALSIFIABILITY, CLEARITY AND PRECISION
Degree of falsifiability, clarity and precision are 3 factors that are important for determinating whether the scientific theory is good or not.
(A) Highly Falsifiable
E.g.
① Mars moves in an ellipse around the sun
② All plants moves in an ellipse around the sun
②is more preferable.
Reason: ② tells us more information
② is more falsifiable
Any falsification of ① will be a falsifiable of ②
(reverse is not)
Orbit of Jupiter falsify ②, but not ①
the potential falsifiers of ① is the subclass of the potential falsifier of ②
(B) Sufficient Clarity Of The Theory
Vague &indefinite = unfalsifiable
Clarity can affect the falsifiability of a theory. For a vague &indefinite theory, it is unfalsifiable when testing a vague theory by experiment; it can always be interpreted as consistent with the result of the test. The demand that theories should be highly falsifiable has the attractive consequence that theories should be clearly states and precise. A theory can’t be so vaguely stated that it is not clear exactly what it is claiming.
(C) Precision Of A Theory
More precise a theory, the more falsifiable and the better the theory.
E.g.
①Plants moves in ellipse around the sun
②Plants moves in closed loops around the sun
①is more falsifiable
Reason: oval orbit falsify the first but not the second
