8

There is nothing without prefiguration in philosophy; and the dead usually rise from their graves. So, to follow Mauro's lead: According to the standard textbook account, verificationism is a doctrine that was popular back in the days of logical positivism. The positivists promised us a 'verifiability criterion of meaningfulness' which would help ...


4

The answer by Geoffrey Thomas is helpful, but a point made in the text deserves amplification. It could reasonably be said that verificationism lives on. But only because the question of "meaningfulness" has been mostly divorced from it: None of these philosophers believes in the 'criterion of meaningfulness' that the positivists hankered after. Science ...


1

It would depend on whether their working definition of to "like" was an objective or subjective one. If you define it in a Skinnerian behaviourist kind of way, as observably drawn to it on repeated occasions and showing particular responses such as smiling and calming down, then yes the logical positivist regards the claim as verifiable. But if you ...


1

If even a single one of the implications of a theory is empirically testable, then the theory is scientific. Testing that one implication would amount to doing a scientific experiment. That being said, the word "empirically testable" means that there must be another theory that predicts a different outcome for that experiment. Then doing the ...


1

When an academic researcher works on a scientific theory, they will do formal experimentation that is (effectively) proof of concept. They don't need to do much: an example or two that shows the theory works in principle is usually more than sufficient for the academic community. The real tests of a theory occur outside academia in pragmatic, technological ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible