When I was googling with word "Marx, Wittegenstein", I encountered an very interesting site.
The site owner ( the blogger ) asks, "Popper is not conducting his own theory, Falsifying test. Is it not same with that he is criticizing on a certain doctrine as if which he holds it being an exception?".
(*I am sorry I can not quote the URL since it is not an English site. )
The blogger's question
The blogger questions, although Popper himself is attacking determinists such as Marx, Wittgenstein, basing on his own theory. But the blogger claims Popper himself was not conducting his own falsifying test on his own theory as I mentioned above. But he also claimed that Popper's way of thinking, to try to doubt anything held so far as true is in a way positive. What do you think of the blogger's question?
Second question : My thought basing on the blogger's question
After having read the blogger's question, I thought about many things.
For example, in Micro Economics, which is prevalent world wide today as a scientific economic theory which employes Utility theory of value, which is, the price of the commodity is measured by how it is useful to the consumers.
Here I came upon an idea. Falsifying Test needs an upper level test in order to confirm if it is a "science" and the theory that withstood the tests as many as possible can be called "a true science"
Regarding how many times ( or how much far ) the tests need to be done for the theory to be a true science is now put aside as for now, Here, I thought the falsifying test be done on Micro Economics, which is extreme. As I mentioned earlier the Micro Economics stand mainly on Utility theory of value, the volume of the labor input is principally forgotten unlike Marx, who held ( widely considered by many people so, but I did not read it so personally ) the price is determined according to the amount of the labor input into the commodity". Now, the atmosphere, which we inhale every day is not traded as a commodity by Micro Economics. despite the fact it has the use value to the "user". If we take the Marx's widely ( meaning commonly held by people ) appreciated theory, since the air does not have the amount of the labor input into, thus the price can not be set. My falsifying test, hypothetically or not, I thought need to be done and went to extreme.
If we have to conduct the test, we have to consider an environment in which the atmosphere is traded as the commodity. Because the Micro Economics on its basic is based on the concept of the Utility theory of value, but does not treat the atmosphere as a commodity the reason of which I described above.** When the atmosphere is traded as the commodity, we have to think a world somewhere or at certain point of time the atmosphere is so scarce. ( Then the price could be set. ) What do you think of such an environment? Is such a test possible or just my dreamy imagination. ( Personally thinking, a thing can be a commodity which has the volume of labor input and at the same time it should be useful to the "consumers" ( Though Marx, to me too thought so personally ). But if we consider the Popperian thought, we have to conduct such an kind of absurd or ultimate test. Am I wrong here?
The last question, about the morality of the falsifying theory. There is a cell in our brain called Glial cells which support the function of the neuron thourh which you well know convey our input "signal" to the brain. Now while many anatomists theorize, we have to conduct the falsifying test repetitively in order for their theories to be the true science. Isn't it ugly? It sounds like we must do what Nazi did in concentration camps on living human beings. Am I wrong here too.
Any answer will be welcomed without any prejudice, thank you for your answers in advance