How many times have you thought about how well a theory was tested before being accepted? Many theorists have sought to determine how well a theory has been tested before being published. Seeking to understand the good and the bad of theories, a concept of falsifiability was created. In this paper, I will explain the concept of falsifiability as well as its relationship to the empirical nature of science. An evaluation of the importance of the falsifiability criterion to the discipline of psychology will be given, along with an example of one mainstream psychological theory that can be falsified and one that cannot be falsified. Finally, I will provide an explanation of the empirical nature of psychology as it applies to each theory.
The concept of falsifiability was developed by Sir Karl Popper, a philosopher of science. Sir Popper’s concept stated that when a theory is tested it must include data which may possible falsify the theory. In other words, when proving the usefulness of a theory, the scientist must also prove what things may go wrong. According to Popper, falsifiability is defined as the inherent testability of any scientific hypothesis. Popper disregarded any theory which did not falsify itself. Because science is so empirical in nature, scientists must ensure theories are empirically tested.
There are three important general principles to the scientific method which are as follows: (1) science employs methods of systematic empiricism; (2) it aims for knowledge that is publicly verifiable; and (3) it seeks problems that are empirically solvable and that yield testable theories. Falsifiability is an important part of the empirical nature of science. It sets a criterion for new theories to ensure they are properly tested. If a theory fails to falsify itself then it is not scientific, rather it is nonscientific.
The falsifiability criterion