Scribd
Upload
7 views2 pages

Verificationism vs. Falsificationism

This document discusses different approaches to distinguishing science from pseudoscience, including verificationism, falsificationism, and problems with each approach. Verificationism holds that scientific claims must be deductively or inductively entailed by observational statements, but this rules out claims about unobservable entities. Falsificationism views scientific theories as those that make testable predictions, but it denies the role of inductive reasoning. Both approaches face issues regarding what counts as an observation or test.

Uploaded by

sv
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
7 views2 pages

Verificationism vs. Falsificationism

This document discusses different approaches to distinguishing science from pseudoscience, including verificationism, falsificationism, and problems with each approach. Verificationism holds that scientific claims must be deductively or inductively entailed by observational statements, but this rules out claims about unobservable entities. Falsificationism views scientific theories as those that make testable predictions, but it denies the role of inductive reasoning. Both approaches face issues regarding what counts as an observation or test.

Uploaded by

sv
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Demarcation Problem: What distinguishes science from pseudo-science?

Verificationism
(Logical
Empiricism)
Scientific claims are those claims
that
are
(deductively
or
inductively)
entailed
by
observational statements.

Falsificationism (Popper)

Applies the demarcation


criterion to

individual claims

whole theories

Background

Empiricism: All knowledge is based Empiricism: All knowledge is based on


on sense experience.
sense experience.

Basic Idea

Scientific theories are those theories that


make predictions that can be falsified using
observations. A scientific theory is the
better the more risks it takes.

Analytic Synthetic Distinction:


Analytic claims are true solely in Inductive Scepticism:
virtue of their meaning. Logic, induction are a myth.
math and philosophy are all
making analytic claims (empty of
worldly content).

Confirmation

and

Verification Theory of Meaning:


The meaning of a synthetic claim is
its method of verification. It must
be
entailed
by
observational
statement.
Relies on

a good theory of what counts as an a good theory of what counts as a testable


observational statement
prediction of a theory
a working theory of confirmation
and a working inductive logic

Problems

rules

out

intuitively

scientific denies the intuitively important role of

claims that are about unobservable inductive reasoning and confirmation


theoretic entities (strings, genes
etc.).
holism about testing (When do I know that
Verification
seems
sometimes I have a falsifying observation, rather than
cheap and easy. It is difficult to a faulty one that should be dismissed?)
give a good theory of confirmation.
holism about meaning and testing
(Quine)

You might also like