{"id":621,"date":"2007-02-25T16:55:33","date_gmt":"2007-02-25T16:55:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/idiolect.truth.posiweb.net\/notes\/?p=621"},"modified":"2007-02-25T16:55:33","modified_gmt":"2007-02-25T16:55:33","slug":"theory-falsification","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/idiolect.org.uk\/notes\/2007\/02\/25\/theory-falsification\/","title":{"rendered":"Theory falsification"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Question: if you want to falsify a theory, do you need a plausible alternative theory?<\/p>\n<p>Toy-examples of falsification suggest not, but I think they mislead. For example: my theory is &#8220;there is a fairy in my cupboard&#8221;. Potentially falsificatory test of this theory: open cupboard &#8211; is there a fairy there? Ignoring for the moment the problem of the impossibility of hard falsification, it looks fairly straight forward. That was the theory, there was the test.<\/p>\n<p>However, this toy example is so simple it allows us to leave implicit the plausible alternative, namely <i>there is no fairy in the cupboard<\/i>. If no plausible alternative is to hand, I don&#8217;t think identifying a potentially falsifying test is so straightforward.<\/p>\n<p>I arrived at this train of thought via a discussion last night about vegetarianism. I was trying to convince people that we have have an evolved disposition to obsess about and ritualise our food behaviours, so that any food habit, however arbitrary or initially unideologically &#8211; for example not eating meat just because you happen to live with vegetarians &#8211; can quickly and easily embed itself in our psychological preferences and become the subject of purity rituals and taboos (&#8220;Don&#8217;t cook my vegeburger in your bacon fat!&#8221; sort of thing).<\/p>\n<p>I&#8217;ve been trying to think of a way to test\/falsify this theory and can&#8217;t. This either means that the information content of the theory is actually minimal &#8211; i.e. it isn&#8217;t actually saying anything &#8211; or it means (my best guess for the truth) that my scientific imagination isn&#8217;t very good. And I think the missing link in my chain of thought it the lack of any apparent plausible alternative. Simple negating the theory (&#8220;food behaviours are not subject to purity obsessive behaviour&#8221;) doesn&#8217;t produce an interesting theory, and the tests that it suggests would, i feel, be passed without actually providing evidence that my theory is any good at all, just better than nothing. In other words, I think I would find people are obsessive about food behaviours, some of which are pretty arbitrary, but I don&#8217;t think this would allow me to convince anyone that what I am saying is true.<\/p>\n<p>The problem may be with the nature of the theory (an evolutionary &#8216;just so&#8217; story?) rather than with falsficiation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Question: if you want to falsify a theory, do you need a plausible alternative theory? Toy-examples of falsification suggest not, but I think they mislead. For example: my theory is &#8220;there is a fairy in my cupboard&#8221;. Potentially falsificatory test of this theory: open cupboard &#8211; is there a fairy there? Ignoring for the moment [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-621","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-science"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p5KQtW-a1","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/idiolect.org.uk\/notes\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/621"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/idiolect.org.uk\/notes\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/idiolect.org.uk\/notes\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/idiolect.org.uk\/notes\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/idiolect.org.uk\/notes\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=621"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/idiolect.org.uk\/notes\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/621\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/idiolect.org.uk\/notes\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=621"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/idiolect.org.uk\/notes\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=621"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/idiolect.org.uk\/notes\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=621"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}