Falsifiability
JHOFMANN@CCVAX.FULLERTON.EDU
Sat, 18 Nov 1995 21:34:30 -0800 (PST)Dear Reflectorites:
At the risk of being scorched, I would like to point out
that there is a serious flaw in Walter Remine's latest comment on
the falsifiability of evolutionary theory. On the one hand he
claims that "there are many independent tests of evolution, and
evolution has failed them." On the other hand, he says that "If
pressed for a categorization, I say evolution is unfalsifiable,
as that is its essential character as practiced by its
proponents." Clearly, evolutionary theory cannot be both
falsified and unfalsifiable.
There are two related points that I would like to make with
respect to this issue. First, this is of course not the first
time this error has occurred. In the famous 1982 ruling on
Arkansas Act 590 on "Balanced Treatment", Judge Overton cited
Ruse"s testimony on the failure of Creation Science to satisfy
Popper's falsifiability criterion; ironically, the scientific
community was and is convinced that the idea of a relatively
young earth is not only falsifiable but thoroughly falsified!
Secondly, the reason for this confusion lies in an ambiguity
that can be avoided. Popper's criterion of falsifiability was
intended to call attention to whether or not a claim could in
principle be falsified by some conceivable evidence. This was
intended to be a relatively "objective" consideration of the
relationship between a knowledge claim and some conceivable
evidence. Unfortunately, attention often shifts from this
relationship to the psychological attitude of the people
involved. I think this happens for both Ruse and Remine when they
allege that creationists or evolutionary theorists bull-headily
refuse to admit that their theories have been falsified.
Unfortunately, Popper never provided any useful guidance for the
determination of when a hypothesis has been appropriately rescued
from a potential falsification by alteration of auxiliary
hypotheses. This problem is developed nicely by Harry Collins and
Trevor Pinch in their 1993 publication _The Golem: What Everybody
should know about Science_.
Jim Hofmann
jhofmann@ccvax.fullerton.edu