|Falsification: experimental or logical refutation of a general or a specific statement. Depending on the nature of the statement, there are differences in terms of whether a single counterexample is sufficient for a falsification, or a certain ratio of positive and negative cases is crucial. See also verification, verificationism, confirmation, Bayesianism, probability, hypotheses, theories._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. |
Thomas S. Kuhn on Falsification - Dictionary of Arguments
Falsification/KuhnVsPopper: In the history of science, there is no example of falsification by comparison with nature - for those who have committed themselves to Newton's theory, his second law is simply a purely logical statement that cannot be contradicted by observations.
Falsification/KuhnVsPopper: Anomalous experiences may not be equated with falsifying ones. I believe that the latter do not exist at all - on the one hand there is too much variation - on the other hand: if only major deviations lead to the rejection of a theory, there is no criterion.
Falsification is always after the event - but then it might as well be called verification of a new paradigm._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago 1962
Die Struktur wissenschaftlicher Revolutionen Frankfurt 1973