This is correct, Falsifiability was origionally concieved of by Karl Popper. I would also add, that while Popper had the best of intentions and good ideas in creating falsifiability theory, it is not generally accepted today by people who study philosophy of science. The consensus, which I agree with, is that it doesn't refelct how science atually works and it eleminatates many things that we do consider science. I mean many people may disagree with string theory, but it's hard for me to accept that it's science at all. Evolution also didn't pass Mr. Popper's tests, but he eventually recanted, not by changing his views on how evolution fits with his theories but just because his friends convinced him that it was "really important."
Popper made contributions to science in that he was one of the main thought leaders that began the field of philosophy of science. That said, I don't think falsifiability by itself is a very good criterion for science or truth.
I don't think the wikipedia article on this is very good. The encyclopedia of philosophy has a much better overview of his theory and where it stands currently
Popper made contributions to science in that he was one of the main thought leaders that began the field of philosophy of science. That said, I don't think falsifiability by itself is a very good criterion for science or truth.
I don't think the wikipedia article on this is very good. The encyclopedia of philosophy has a much better overview of his theory and where it stands currently
https://iep.utm.edu/pop-sci/#H3