falsifiability update:
1. i predicted a comfortable biden win, even after the debate (unfalsifiable! though he continued to deteriorate and the swap was seamless and very favorable) and i am sitll confident that this is a walk for harris
2. at least one court will do something so stupid that it briefly terrifies me
2. at least one court will do something so stupid that it briefly terrifies me
i think every political poster on Bluesky should be required to pre-register at least two election takes
November 6, 2024 at 3:57 PM
falsifiability update:
What is common knowledge in your field but shocks outsiders?
“Falsifiability” does not demarcate science from non-science.
“Falsifiability” does not demarcate science from non-science.
What is common knowledge in your field but shocks outsiders?
If you try to “warm up” a gravitationally bound system (of, e.g., stars or dark matter) by adding heat, you end up making it colder; if you take heat away, you make it warmer
If you try to “warm up” a gravitationally bound system (of, e.g., stars or dark matter) by adding heat, you end up making it colder; if you take heat away, you make it warmer
What is common knowledge in your field but shocks outsiders?
Isaac Asimov was such a perv people were literally assigned at conventions to stand between him and women fans to prevent his incessant groping
Isaac Asimov was such a perv people were literally assigned at conventions to stand between him and women fans to prevent his incessant groping
June 17, 2025 at 11:28 PM
What is common knowledge in your field but shocks outsiders?
“Falsifiability” does not demarcate science from non-science.
“Falsifiability” does not demarcate science from non-science.
A little thread: Science is defiantly anti-fascist because it pursues truth, is necessarily collaborative, and relies on open communication. And because its falsifiability is incompatible with the cultism, faith-based belief systems, disinformation, and propaganda of Christian nationalism.
November 9, 2024 at 10:46 PM
A little thread: Science is defiantly anti-fascist because it pursues truth, is necessarily collaborative, and relies on open communication. And because its falsifiability is incompatible with the cultism, faith-based belief systems, disinformation, and propaganda of Christian nationalism.
Seventh: "falsifiability of hypotheses": Not all research is built around testing hypotheses, and there are piles of critiques of Popperian falsifiability
May 24, 2025 at 12:24 AM
Seventh: "falsifiability of hypotheses": Not all research is built around testing hypotheses, and there are piles of critiques of Popperian falsifiability
The difference between falsifiability as a logical criterion and as a methodical practice perfectly illustrated.
There's a pet psychic who got called out on Tiktok for being a fraud (getting every detail of the pet owner's life wrong) and the pet psychic responded saying that the pets must have been lying to her
May 14, 2025 at 5:42 PM
The difference between falsifiability as a logical criterion and as a methodical practice perfectly illustrated.
That ‘falsifiability’ is not regarded by contemporary philosophers as the demarcation line between science and pseudoscience.
What is common knowledge in your field, but shocks outsiders?
I'll start: Amazon makes more money out of their Cloud services than out of their e-commerce platform.
I'll start: Amazon makes more money out of their Cloud services than out of their e-commerce platform.
October 15, 2023 at 9:17 PM
That ‘falsifiability’ is not regarded by contemporary philosophers as the demarcation line between science and pseudoscience.
I’m all about falsifiability this evening
September 24, 2026 at 6:42 AM
I’m all about falsifiability this evening
Falsifiability and Popper?
June 7, 2025 at 4:22 PM
Falsifiability and Popper?
sometimes i think about how I had one History of Science class in High School that did two days on Falsifiability and that has prevented me from falling for untold numbers of scams and crankdoms
December 21, 2025 at 7:48 AM
sometimes i think about how I had one History of Science class in High School that did two days on Falsifiability and that has prevented me from falling for untold numbers of scams and crankdoms
This is why fascism works so hard to eliminate science. At its core, Scientific Method is just “objectivity + falsifiability + humility.” Scientists are the very last people fascists want in positions of authority.
Achieving greater objectivity and understanding is exhausting, it requires turning back to look at yourself and chipping away at ideas that you've grown accustomed to having. I think the true appeal of fascism, the root appeal, is how it promises to relieve you of this obligation. "You can be empty"
February 10, 2025 at 2:26 PM
This is why fascism works so hard to eliminate science. At its core, Scientific Method is just “objectivity + falsifiability + humility.” Scientists are the very last people fascists want in positions of authority.
like at some point you have abstracted your ideas beyond any hope of falsifiability, or even discussion. and that pretty much is where these people have ended up.
April 21, 2025 at 7:13 PM
like at some point you have abstracted your ideas beyond any hope of falsifiability, or even discussion. and that pretty much is where these people have ended up.
Illumination Magazine just published my 3-minute read, "Falsifiability: What Could Prove Your Hunch is Wrong?" If you like it, please clap for it. Click & hold the applause button to fast-clap to the max of 50; it makes me very happy.
medium.com/illumination...
medium.com/illumination...
Falsifiability:
What Could Prove Your Hunch is Wrong?
medium.com
January 31, 2026 at 1:27 AM
Illumination Magazine just published my 3-minute read, "Falsifiability: What Could Prove Your Hunch is Wrong?" If you like it, please clap for it. Click & hold the applause button to fast-clap to the max of 50; it makes me very happy.
medium.com/illumination...
medium.com/illumination...
Ah. We've decided that untestable hypotheses beat the potential downsides of falsifiability. Quelle suprise.
Unfortunately I don’t think this works, because ultimately, people don’t get their information from social media, but from each other. Social media is an initial vector; ideas spread outside of it. Sane as how you can’t test if COVID came from bats by seeing if cases are correlated to bat exposure.
Interesting hypothesis, possibly testable. Anyone know of high-quality polls that have social media use in the crosstabs? Be interesting to see if economic sentiment correlates with social media use.
April 13, 2026 at 5:25 PM
Ah. We've decided that untestable hypotheses beat the potential downsides of falsifiability. Quelle suprise.
babygirl you know what falsifiability is right
August 14, 2024 at 12:04 PM
babygirl you know what falsifiability is right
ah yes, freud, paragon of scientific method and falsifiability that he was
March 1, 2026 at 3:13 PM
ah yes, freud, paragon of scientific method and falsifiability that he was
Falsifiability is crucial. Sociology broke when it was rejected.
everyone who is not actually an empiricist eventually becomes the same kind of crank
April 13, 2026 at 6:24 PM
Falsifiability is crucial. Sociology broke when it was rejected.
Academics are rigorous for a reason. That reason is recognizing the importance of falsifiability and verifiability, both of which are very clearly being lost with ai, which is capable of neither.
September 8, 2026 at 11:25 AM
Academics are rigorous for a reason. That reason is recognizing the importance of falsifiability and verifiability, both of which are very clearly being lost with ai, which is capable of neither.
The brain is all about dimensionality reduction.
The limits of falsifiability: Dimensionality, measurement thresholds, and the sub-Landauer domain in biological systems
doi.org/10.1016/j.bi...
#neuroscience
The limits of falsifiability: Dimensionality, measurement thresholds, and the sub-Landauer domain in biological systems
doi.org/10.1016/j.bi...
#neuroscience
Redirecting
doi.org
October 18, 2025 at 1:58 PM
The brain is all about dimensionality reduction.
The limits of falsifiability: Dimensionality, measurement thresholds, and the sub-Landauer domain in biological systems
doi.org/10.1016/j.bi...
#neuroscience
The limits of falsifiability: Dimensionality, measurement thresholds, and the sub-Landauer domain in biological systems
doi.org/10.1016/j.bi...
#neuroscience
5/ He also either does not understand or willfully mischaracterizes #StructuralRacism research. He claims that such research fails Karl Popper’s falsifiability concept: for a theory to be considered scientific, it must be capable of being proven false: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...
Falsifiability in medicine: what clinicians can learn from Karl Popper
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
July 7, 2025 at 4:05 AM
5/ He also either does not understand or willfully mischaracterizes #StructuralRacism research. He claims that such research fails Karl Popper’s falsifiability concept: for a theory to be considered scientific, it must be capable of being proven false: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...
Science adheres to demands evidence, falsifiability, & repeatable experiments, while pseudoscience lacks these standards. Science seeks to disprove ideas, works with detailed evidence, and aims for accurate knowledge, making the process demanding. In contrast, pseudoscience begins with a conclusion.
August 22, 2025 at 1:03 AM
Science adheres to demands evidence, falsifiability, & repeatable experiments, while pseudoscience lacks these standards. Science seeks to disprove ideas, works with detailed evidence, and aims for accurate knowledge, making the process demanding. In contrast, pseudoscience begins with a conclusion.
It’s true. If there’s one thing that defines science, it’s lack of falsifiability.
June 9, 2025 at 2:18 AM
It’s true. If there’s one thing that defines science, it’s lack of falsifiability.
Only allowing science that is "structured for falsifiability of the hypothesis" does not really allow for science that deals with the complex or uncertain. To my eye this seems specifically designed to dismiss the use of science or evidence in policy.
May 24, 2025 at 7:15 AM
Only allowing science that is "structured for falsifiability of the hypothesis" does not really allow for science that deals with the complex or uncertain. To my eye this seems specifically designed to dismiss the use of science or evidence in policy.
This is an extremely basic falsifiability issue, actually. "You can't prove it's NOT thinking" is not an argument.
June 7, 2025 at 12:24 PM
This is an extremely basic falsifiability issue, actually. "You can't prove it's NOT thinking" is not an argument.
To paraphrase @foldablehuman.bsky.social , by winning, they've activated the trap card of falsifiability. When their shit inevitably fails and everything gets worse under them, kinda gets harder to successfully shift the blame for the prior not-as-bad-as-now to the Other, dunnit.
The modern conservative hates winning more than losing. There are no games journalists left, all the devs have been fired and everyone in a position of influence is terrified of offending reactionaries. They got what they asked for, and they still hate it! Because a woman said a thing!
You’re welcome
August 10, 2026 at 5:19 PM
To paraphrase @foldablehuman.bsky.social , by winning, they've activated the trap card of falsifiability. When their shit inevitably fails and everything gets worse under them, kinda gets harder to successfully shift the blame for the prior not-as-bad-as-now to the Other, dunnit.