Distinguish a criterion of empirical meaningfulness from a methodological demand for verification, and conclusive verification from fallible scientific confirmation.
A hypothesis is falsifiable if some possible empirical outcomes conflict with it under specified testing assumptions. Falsifiability does not mean that an anomalous reading identifies which member of a theoretical package is false, or that a falsifiable statement is well supported.
A methodology emphasizing conjectures exposed to demanding attempts at refutation. Falsifiability is a property of claims under testing assumptions; falsificationism is a view about scientific practice.
An intersubjectively testable report of an observable occurrence in specified circumstances, capable of participating in a test or attempted falsification. In Karl Popper's account, accepting a basic statement is provisional and may be reopened by further testing.[ref]
The Logic of Scientific Discovery by Karl Popper. Sections 28–30
Karl Popper's appraisal of a conjecture's survival of demanding tests relative to accepted basic statements. It is a retrospective methodological assessment, distinct from a proof of truth or an inductive probability of truth.[ref]
The Logic of Scientific Discovery by Karl Popper. Sections 82–84
Articles by others on the same topic
The Demarcation Problem is a philosophical issue concerning the distinction between science and non-science (including pseudoscience). It seeks to establish criteria that can effectively differentiate scientific practices, theories, and methodologies from those that do not meet the standards of scientific rigor. Key aspects of the Demarcation Problem include: 1. **Scientific Method**: Many discussions revolve around the criteria defining what constitutes the scientific method, such as falsifiability, testability, and empirical validation.