erikp writes:
quote:
I think such a theory would definitely be possible, in which case we would have a falsifiable theory that would reflect the ultimate truth and would therefore never be falsified in practice.
Not one theory in the current body of science claims this.
I am not speaking of a theory in the current body of science. I am talking about the logical possibility of a hypothetical theory that's spot on with regard to an aspect of nature.
What's more, Gdel's second incompleteness theory, which is supported by formal proof, says that a theory that makes statements concerning its own consistency (truth), is necessarily inconsistent (false).
Where did I say that the theory makes claims about its own consistency?
A theory can therefore not claim its own truth. In addition to that, any sufficiently complex theory is falsifiable by an infinite number of future statements, and is therefore eternally unproven.
You have a strange idea of falsifiability.
In those circumstances, how could anybody ever claim the ultimate truth of such theory?
It doesn't matter whether we can claim that our theory is absolutely true. We may not even know it. But it's possible that it is. That's all I'm saying.
A theory falsifiable by a finite number of facts, can be completely true, and will be proven after observing the last fact. A theory falsifiable by 10 facts and not falsified by any of them, is true. The same for 9,8,7,6,5,...,2,1 facts. What about zero facts?
The principle of continuity demands that a theory falsifiable by zero facts and (obviously) not falsified by them, is true. Therefore, unfalsifiable theories must be considered: true.
Again, what a strange concept of falsifiability you have. In the scientific community 'falsifiability' means that it is possible to state at least one observation that would invalidate ('falsify') the theory. If you cannot do so your theory is considered unscientific. That's what scientists mean by falsifiability.
Here's an example of a falsifiable theory: black swans do not exist. If no one has ever seen a black swan, we don't know if the theory is true or not, but we know it is falsifiable because we can think of an observation that would falsify it: if we see a black swan anywhere, we will know the theory is false.
Now for an example of an unfalsifiable theory, solipsism. It goes something like this: "I alone exist and everything I see around me is a figment of my imagination." There is no observation anyone can point to that would falsify it, because I could always say that it's just another figment of my imagination, as is the person arguing it.
Obviously, unfalsifiable theories must
not be considered true. They might be true, or they might be false, but we'll never know and because of that, they're useless. They are simply not viable as theories.
A true theory can therefore only consist of (necessarily past) facts and unfalsifiable claims (religion).
Utter bollocks.
Edited by Parasomnium, : No reason given.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.
™ Version 4.2
