Practice question · True or false
A claim that no conceivable observation could ever contradict is, for that very reason, not a scientific hypothesis at all.
Hints
- Connect 'impossible to contradict' to Popper's falsifiability requirement.
- If no observation could count against it, no test could genuinely support it either.
Show the answer
True
Why
True. Falsifiability requires that some possible observation could count against a claim; a claim immune to any disproof is unfalsifiable and therefore unscientific. Being un-contradictable is a disqualification, not a strength.
Practise The Scientific Method
The app has 6 more questions on this lesson, and keeps your place in the course. Psychology I is free to start.
More questions on The Scientific Method
- Put the stages of the scientific method in the order a researcher actually moves through them.
- Select every statement that is TRUE about scientific reasoning.
- "Everyone has a hidden trauma; if you cannot recall it, that is the repression proving it." Why does Popper's…
- A researcher's theory predicts every score will land between 40 and 60. Six results come back: 44, 38, 52,…
- "All swans observed so far have been white, so all swans are white" and "All swans are white, so the next…