Overview
This lecture discusses philosopher Karl Popper's criteria for distinguishing science from pseudoscience, emphasizing the importance of falsifiability in scientific theories and the nature of knowledge.
Popper, Science, and Pseudoscience
- Karl Popper studied methods used by scientists like Einstein and Freud.
- Popper noticed Freudâs psychoanalysis could explain any outcome, while Einsteinâs relativity made risky, testable predictions.
- He defined science as making predictions that could be proven false, while pseudoscience only seeks confirmation.
- Scientific theories should be refutable; if a theory cannot be disproved, it's not scientific.
- Science advances by trying to disprove hypotheses, not confirm them.
The Scientific Method and Falsifiability
- Traditional scientific method focused on observation without preconceptions.
- Popper argued everyone starts with some preconceived notions.
- Confirmation bias leads to seeing only supporting evidence for beliefs.
- Real tests of theories aim to falsify; science is about disconfirmation, not confirmation.
- Willingness to abandon disproven theories is essential for scientific progress.
Knowledge, Probability, and Openness
- Popper believed knowledge is provisional and based on current evidence, not certainty.
- Justified beliefs should always be open to revision when new evidence appears.
- Certainty leads to closed-mindedness and hinders progress toward truth.
Key Terms & Definitions
- Pseudoscience â A field that seeks only to confirm its beliefs and cannot be falsified.
- Falsifiability â The capacity for a theory to be disproven by evidence.
- Confirmation Bias â The tendency to search for or interpret information that confirms one's beliefs.
- Contingency â Holding beliefs tentatively and being ready to revise them with new evidence.
Action Items / Next Steps
- Remember: Accept and revise beliefs based on evidence, not certainty.
- Prepare to discuss the challenges of justifying beliefs in future lectures, starting with the topic of God.