Philosophy Of Science (Falsification) Example

Philosophy Of Science (Falsification) Example Philosophy Of Science (Falsification) – Coursework Example Philosophy of Science: Falsification Response to the First Criticism A falsificationist can indeed propose theories that he/she believes that are nottrue, but subject to falsification. But despite this fact, a falsificationist would find it practically difficult to practice science because science mainly involves the application of scientific theories in different kinds of situations that the theory promises to explain, but not looking for an evidence to refute the theory. Many discoveries in science are made through the application of scientific theories in many situations that the theory promises to explain. For this reason, therefore, although a falsificationism is a theory of whether science produces theories, and a falsificationist can, indeed, propose a scientific theory, in actual practice, however, a falsificationist would find it difficult to practice science. The actual practice of science requires the application scientific theories to different situations so as to uncover and discover more facts, rather than looking for an evidence to contradict the theory. In some instances, scientists even ignore some anomalies or some falsifying evidence in a scientific theory, and go ahead to apply the theory in different situations. If scientists strictly follow Popper’s falsification method, some scientific theories such as those of Copernicus, Newton, and Darwin, would have been thrown in their infancy. For this reason, therefore, it is practically impossible for a falsificationist to practice science.Response to the Second CriticismFor Karl Popper, the more a scientific theory resists falsification, the stronger the scientific theory. What this means for Karl Popper is that, as long there are ways to prove a scientific theory false, the more the theory resists falsification the stronger the scientific theory. This, however, does not mean that the more evidence we have of a theory, the stronger is the theory. For Popper, actually, the more evidence doe s not a scientific theory stronger. By saying that the more a scientific theory resists falsification, the stronger the scientific theory, Popper means that, the more a scientific theory resists falsification, the longer will the theory be held as a true account of reality.