On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Roger Clough <rclo...@verizon.net> wrote:

> I don't hold to Popper's criterion. There's got to be a lot of things
> that are not falsifiable.

Popper didn't say everything is falsifiable, he said if it's not
falsifiable then it's pointless to subject your valuable brain cells to the
ware and tear of thinking about them because you're never going to make any
progress, none zero goose egg. Your time could be better spent thinking
about other things, falsifiable things, because those you just might be
able to figure out; no guarantee but at least you have a chance.

> For example, you drop an apple and gravity pulls it down. You can't turn
> off the gravity to falsify it

Yes you can, get in a rocket and travel far from the center of the earth,
or just get in a elevator and cut the cable.

> Actually, Hume discussed cause and effect to some great length. He said
> [blah blah]. Leibniz also believed as Hume did.

These philosophers died several centuries before the discovery of
Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, the electromagnetic theory of light and even
thermodynamics and a understanding of what energy and entropy are. They
knew nothing about chemistry or atoms and couldn't tell a electron from
Electra,  they didn't know about the big bang or that the universe was
expanding much less accelerating, in fact the very concept of acceleration
would have been considered cutting edge science for them. The idea that
these ancients had anything useful to say to a modern physicist about cause
and effect or anything else is utterly ridiculous.

 John K Clark

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to