Falsification Principle
- Created by: Awesomelyevil
- Created on: 12-12-16 18:28
View mindmap
- Falsification Principle
- Falsification in Science
- Scientists hold that a theory is a working hypothesis so long as it cannot be falsified (i.e. so long as nothing can be shown to count against the hypothesis).
- Anthony Flew
- Anthony Flew argued that if a statement or belief cannot be falsified (i.e. nothing is allowed to count against it) it is meaningless. He used his parable of a gardener
- Flew argues that since the religious believer refuses to accept the possibility that there is any evidence to the contrary. He took the example of the statement "God loves us".
- If nothing is allowed to falsify this belief (e.g. evil or suffering), with believers using the excuse that "The Lord moves in mysterious ways", then the statement is meaningless.
- Flew argues that since the religious believer refuses to accept the possibility that there is any evidence to the contrary. He took the example of the statement "God loves us".
- Anthony Flew argued that if a statement or belief cannot be falsified (i.e. nothing is allowed to count against it) it is meaningless. He used his parable of a gardener
- Robert Prevost
- In Probability and Theistic Explanation he argues that since religious beliefs are based on trust, this trust should hold no matter what temptations confront the believer.
- Prevost argues that it is rational to believe that time will prove the faith justified. He also cites the example of a parent's love for its child - the child's being disciplined would not normally lead the child to doubt the parent's love.
- A statement of belief is an interpretation of reality based on perceptions of a pattern in the world. Statements dealing with the existence of God are on the same level as aesthetic judgements - "The difference as to whether a God exists… is like a difference as to whether there is beauty in a thing". (John Wisdom).
- In Probability and Theistic Explanation he argues that since religious beliefs are based on trust, this trust should hold no matter what temptations confront the believer.
- R.M. Hare
- Religious Language in non-cognitive because it cannot be falsified, however it is not meaningless. He argues that we have beliefs that we hold in spite of the evidence against them. These are called bliks
- He illustrates in his parable: A student is convinced that all his lecturers are out to murder him. He is convinced of this even when the lecturers are being pleasant! When this happens he simply decides that they are being hypocritical. His belief is unshakable.
- Religious people believe they have good reason to hold their beliefs. The Blik is meaningful even when it cannot be falsified, because it affects the way that someone feels.
- He illustrates in his parable: A student is convinced that all his lecturers are out to murder him. He is convinced of this even when the lecturers are being pleasant! When this happens he simply decides that they are being hypocritical. His belief is unshakable.
- Religious Language in non-cognitive because it cannot be falsified, however it is not meaningless. He argues that we have beliefs that we hold in spite of the evidence against them. These are called bliks
- Basil Mitchell
- Religious Beliefs are not amenable to falsification, but this does not mean that they are not a legitimate interpretation of reality based on the World.
- Basil Mitchell argues that religious statements are meaningful because they are falsifiable in principle
- During a war, a resistance fighter meets a mysterious stranger. The stranger persuades the fighter that he is on the side of the resistance, even though sometimes it appears that he is on the side of the enemy. The fighter's faith in the stranger is then tested constantly. Sometimes he appears to support the resistance, yet sometimes he appears to be working against them. When he feels that his faith in the stranger isReligious Language: Falsification3being tested, the fighter responds to questions with, "The stranger knows best".
- In his parable it is impossible to tell at what point the fighter might lose that faith in the stranger - this is how faith works. Despite the existence of things that count against religious faith, there are many things that keep it alive. Because nothing in the believer's life counts decisively against his belief, he holds fast to it.
- During a war, a resistance fighter meets a mysterious stranger. The stranger persuades the fighter that he is on the side of the resistance, even though sometimes it appears that he is on the side of the enemy. The fighter's faith in the stranger is then tested constantly. Sometimes he appears to support the resistance, yet sometimes he appears to be working against them. When he feels that his faith in the stranger isReligious Language: Falsification3being tested, the fighter responds to questions with, "The stranger knows best".
- John Hick
- Religious language is meaningful because it can be verified in the future. Religious people hold their beliefs on trust, assuming that they will be vindicated in the future. This eschatological verification is illustrated by a parable
- In Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress there are two people journeying towards the Celestial City. One is convinced that there is a city, while the other person is not. Both people travel the road - one or the other will be vindicated in the end, when the truth will be known. In the meantime, the believer journeys in the belief that the City is there, and lives accordingly.
- Hick does not suggest grounds for verifying the grounds for belief in the here-and-now. However, it does not make the belief irrational. The ordinary believer is prepared to believe that his faith will be verified eventually, and this belief is a part of the whole faith-package.
- In Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress there are two people journeying towards the Celestial City. One is convinced that there is a city, while the other person is not. Both people travel the road - one or the other will be vindicated in the end, when the truth will be known. In the meantime, the believer journeys in the belief that the City is there, and lives accordingly.
- Religious language is meaningful because it can be verified in the future. Religious people hold their beliefs on trust, assuming that they will be vindicated in the future. This eschatological verification is illustrated by a parable
- Falsification in Science
Comments
No comments have yet been made