Popper and falsification

[MalcolmX]

I get caught up in discussions now and then we're it's pretty much flat stated that Marxism is not scientific on th grounds of Popperian falsifiability, I hae no particular problem rebutting this, being vaguely acquainted with Paul Feyreband's work, but I was wondering if there has been any Marxists who have rebutted Popper - especially if they wiped the floor with him......

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Well, this is a right wing red herring; scientists have never used falsifiability as a criterion, and if they were to use it, much of scientific research would have ground to a halt.

For instance, Copernican Astronomy predicted stellar parallax, which was not observed until 1838 with the work of Friedrich Bessel, three hundred years after Copernicus's book was published. Had 16th century scientists been Popperians, Copernicus's system would have been stillborn.

Similarly, Darwin's theory of descent through modification made predictions that were at variance with patently obvious facts: the persistence of inherited variations. The latter were inconsistent with Darwin's own "blending" theory of transmission. Given Darwin's account, new and advantageous variations should be blended out of a breeding population, not preserved or enhanced. It was not until the advent of genetically-based theories of inheritance forty or so years later that Darwin's theory became viable. Again, a 19th century Popper would have thrown out one of the most successful and important theories of all time.

Furthermore, Newton's Second Law is unfalsifiable (there is no way to test it since all the terms are inter-defined), but which scientist is going to throw it out?

I have defended Marxism in depth against a Popperian style attack here:

http://z11.invisionfree.com/Kasama_Threads/index.php?showtopic=802

My comments begin on page two.

[MalcolmX]

thank you rosa, i've taken the line of argument regarding Copernicus/Galileo/Bessel myself, so long as I'm on the right track!

I especially like this: "Popper's theory is therefore fundamentally flawed.

All this was pointed out to him, but he refused to abandon it in the face of these problems, ironically refuting his own theory in the process!"

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Indeed, Popperians are notorious in their refusal to admit that Popper's theory of falsification is itself falsifiable!