Falsification

• The Falsification Principle (Karl Popper)

  A statement is meaningful if it accepts possible evidence that could be used against it to prove it to be wrong.
• The falsification symposium

  Anthony Flew applied Poppers falsification principle to religious language. The falsification symposium consists of a series of essays, starting with Flew followed by responses from R.M. Hare and B. Mitchell. They discuss whether religious language can be classified in the same way as scientific statements. Each philosopher used a parable.
• Anthony Flews parable of the gardener

  Flew adapts John Wisdom's original parable of two jungle explorers. Two explorers find a clearing in a jungle, one assumes there must be a gardener, the other disagrees. They stake out the area and never see a gardener. So the first explorer surmises that the gardener must be invisible, scentless, etc. What is the difference between this and no gardener?
• Implications of Anthony Flews parable of the gardener

  Flew argues this is how believers use religious language. They make a claim which sounds scientific such as 'God created the world' but they refuse to accept evidence that would falsify it. For example on cases of love believers don't accept evil and suffering to falsify this. They may qualify why this is the case and so the original assertion has completely changed. It has 'died the death of 1000 qualifications.
• R.M. Hares parable of the lunatic student and his professors


  A student believes all his professors are out to kill him no matter how much evidence is provided to them of their professors kindness.
• Implications of R.M. Hares parable of the lunatic student and his professors


  Hare claims the deluded student has a blik, a belief about his professors that cannot be changed. Hare argues that religious statements are different from scientific assertations because they are bliks - they express a worldview or fundamental belief. Bliks can be sane or insane but either way they have a great effect on our lives and cannot be altered. Hare argues that Flew has not understood how religious language works. Bliks cannot be falsified but have a huge impact
• Bliks

  unfalsifiable beliefs according to which a worldview is established – which are not necessarily meaningless
• B. Mitchell's parable of the stranger

  A resistance fighter meets a stranger and after chatting is convinced the stranger is on the resistances side. However, the next night the fighter sees the stranger working with the other side but is still convinced the stranger is on their side.
• The implications of B. Mitchell's parable of the stranger



  Theologians grapple with challenges to 'God is loving'; they do not simply discount evidence as Flew claims, or refuse to acknowledge it, like Hares bliks, as this would be a failure of faith and logic. Mitchell argues instead that believers do not allow evidence to decisively count against their statement because they have an underlying reason for their faith.
• Flew argues that believers think that religious language is used in the same way as scientific assertions. For example, 'God is a loving creator'. But this is incorrect because believers will not allow any evidence to falsify their statements. Instead, they keep qualifying their original statement until nothing is left.
• Falsification helps to clarify which statements are scientific and which are non-scientific.
• Religious language is not like scientific claims which can be tested and are falsifiable, Hare suggests that religious statements are bliks - unfalsifiable beliefs that are either sane or insane but are not affected by contrary evidence.
• Mitchell argues that while religious claims are not falsifiable , believers do seriously consider evidence against them but it does not discount their belief as they have an underlying reason
• Flew argues that believers make statements that are scientific claims so they should be judged by the same criteria.
• Hare's bliks support the non-cognitive use of religious language. It may be important to an individual but it is not a truth claim. Bliks are not a matter of true or false - non-cognitive.