from the falsificationism point of view, it can never be said that a theory is true, but it can only be said that it is the best theory currently available—since it has not yet been successfully falsified. Falsificationist science does not constitute of proven facts but of theories that nobody has yet been able to falsify.
it is interesting to find out that Kuhn (1996) in his book criticised this falsificationism thoery that when scientists find difference between the theories and their own experimental findings, they do not follow faflsificationism and give up their theories. But instead they try to find somehow find a way to accomodate their abnormal findings with their theories. In other words, they try to somehow put their findings to some theoretical use rather than saying their finding was false. It is somehow true in a sense that someones findings cannot be said fully false if they have done it through enough observation and analytical
[1] Kuhn, Thomas (1996 [1962]) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (3rd edition). The University of Chicago Press: Chicago, USA.
No comments:
Post a Comment