From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Mon Aug 23 2004 - 19:50:09 BST
MSH:
> On 23 Aug 2004 at 9:57, Platt Holden wrote:
> A problem with Popper's idea of falsification that it doesn't work
> when applied to his theory of falsification. In other words, his own
> theory isn't falsifiable. Thus, it is as non-scientific and as
> questionable as religious "theories."
>
> Popper's theory is hoisted on its own petard.
> msh says:
> Platt, you've just shown it to be falsifiable.
Thanks. You make my point. By his own standards Popper's theory isn't
true.
> Seriously, the circular vertigo you're experiencing is because you
> think he's claiming that his idea is scientific. He's not, and it
> isn't. It's a philosophical idea ABOUT science. It's meta-science.
If you can show that Popper makes a distinction between types of theories,
I'll accept your point. Otherwise, I have to believe he considers his
theory scientific.
The next question to Popper is: According to what theory are "facts" to
be defined that one can use to falsify a theory? Recall that Pirsig says
"Even the facts that people observe to confirm the 'truth' are dependent
on the culture they live in." (Lila, 26)
> Furthermore, I forbid you to use the "petard" image unless you can
> tell me whence it comes. No fair looking it up...
I know from whence it comes. Do you? What's your point?
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 23 2004 - 19:46:27 BST