Falsifiability Theory
Andre A. Moenssens
Abstract
Andre A. Moenssens
Abstract
Abstract A theory propounded by Popper, a philosopher of science, suggests that the difference between true science and pseudoscience is that the former is testable, whereas the latter is not. In testing scientific hypotheses, researchers seek to prove it wrong (“falsify”). If efforts to falsify do not result in providing evidence of an inherent failing of the postulate, the premise is tentatively adopted as a workable hypothesis that may be applied to the future, like inquiries. This article discusses the degree of acceptance Popper's theory has among scientists as well as the manner in which it gained prominence among forensic scientists and some courts.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Abstract A theory propounded by Popper, a philosopher of science, suggests that the difference between true science and pseudoscience is that the former is testable, whereas the latter is not. In testing scientific hypotheses, researchers seek to prove it wrong (“falsify”). If efforts to falsify do not result in providing evidence of an inherent failing of the postulate, the premise is tentatively adopted as a workable hypothesis that may be applied to the future, like inquiries. This article discusses the degree of acceptance Popper's theory has among scientists as well as the manner in which it gained prominence among forensic scientists and some courts.
Key concepts: Falsifiability, Pseudoscience, Premise, Karl popper, Epistemology, Scientific theory, Psychology, Philosophy