Psychology

Falsifiability is the inherent testability of scientific hypothesis. It can also be referred to as refutability which is the logical propensity that an assertion can be shown to be false by either physical experiment or observations. The argument held in falsifiability is that when something is named to be false, it does not mean that it is false per se but, in case it is false, then it can be proved by a mean of a physical experiment or by observing. Quite related to falsifiability is the term testability which makes a more direct meaning. Testability is the argument that an assertion can exclusively be falsified by experimentation. The strong argument comes from the reasoning in philosophy, a field that has worked together with science in unraveling the hidden truths about the universe and the world in which man inhabits (Kopper, 1962). The two, science and philosophy, are imperative for the advancement of human knowledge and the general human society development.

Relationship to the Empirical Nature of Science
The statement that all men are mortal lacks some form of scientific empiricism. Scientists always design experiments which provide measurable results used to prove or disapprove concepts. Philosophers act as the driving force in determining the validity of all scientific results before implementation of any policy. The sheer understanding of the statement and the general meaning of the statement in real life finds no problem with the statement. It is regarded as complete and nothing to be added or subtracted (Furst, 2010).

All humans are known to die at some time in their life and the statement that all men are mortal does not mean a controversy to the common understanding. This is the point where falsifiability comes in. it may not mean that the statement is false, but the statement stands to be challenged and proven to be right or wrong. Falsifiabilty maintains that for any hypotheses to be given credence, it has to be disprovable in order to be accepted as scientific proof.

Common statements such as does God exist may appear to be rhetoric to believers that God exists. This statement is never scientific since it has not passed through a rigorous process of checking the scientific validity. It cannot be assumed that God exists from a theoretical perspective in science, all statements have to be tested and empirically shown to be true (Experiment-Resource.com, n.d). The theory that God exists doe not offer to be disproved hence does not satisfy scientific creditability.

The concept of falsifiability holds that there is no theory that is utterly correct unless it passes scrutiny. However, when the theory passes through scrutiny and is not found to be falsified, then that theory can be accepted as a scientific truth. Challenges and philosophical criticism have been directed to numerous theories developed by most of the earlier theorists as well as the theorists today. For instance, the Theory of Gravity which was coined by Sir Isaac Newton was accepted as the truth after the observation that all objects dont randomly float away from the earth (Furst, 2010). Although Newtons theory satisfied all the figures that were obtained after rigorous experimentations and keen research, the reasoning had to be subjected to serous testing.

The acceptance of Newtons Theory of Gravity was witnessed at early stages but later investigations into the theory showed that the laws that were proposed by Newton broke down making the theory not be accepted as truth. By saying that Isaacs concepts where not the truth and were broken down does not mean that his concepts have become obsolete. In fact, most of his concepts are widely used in NASA in the plotting of the courses of the satellites as well as the space probes.

Karl Popper, a philosopher who first coined the word falsifiability saw the term as white and black definitions. To Popper, if a theory was falsifiable, then that theory was definitely scientific. Incase the theory is not falsifiable, that theory is automatically regarded to be unscientific. This concept was strictly followed by earlier scientists although the modern science has revolutionized concepts and there has been what may be known as pseudoscience.

According to Popper, several branches of applied sciences particularly the applied science and the social science do not claim to be scientific at all because they do not offer any possibility of falsification. For instance, anthropology as well as sociology has often used case studies to make observations about the people in their natural habitats without the need to test any form of hypotheses and theories (Experiment-Resource.com, n.d). However, the general acceptance that these forms of sciences have made progression in human development makes them to be accepted in the society.

For a number of years, there have been a form of reasoning about pure sciences and that of falsifiability as being important tools for the generation of the theories that are realistic and testable. The world has gained from Poppers idea in a manner that the truth can be falsified when there is more resources and knowledge. However, the idea of falsifiability scores low because of its strictness in its definition. The idea does not take into account that many of the sciences are descriptive and observable.