8 upvotes, 2 direct replies (showing 2)
That's very different from what you said in your last post; you weren't simplifying but making an unrelated claim.
And you are correct; physicalism is unfalsifiable. It also is not a scientific theory, and as such is unrelated to Popper's stance on falsifiability as a central requirement of scientific inquiry. Another example of a stance that is unfalsifiable would be, well, Popper's stance on falsifiability.
Comment by reddituserperson1122 at 24/02/2025 at 14:26 UTC
3 upvotes, 0 direct replies
👆
Comment by WorkItMakeItDoIt at 24/02/2025 at 14:35 UTC
3 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I wrote that off the cuff in frustration and made a mistake about the direction of implication. There is overlap in that they are built on observation, but they aren't the same. Thank you for your understanding.
I am fine with what you're saying.
If you are a physicalist, then you aren't like other physicalists I've encountered, who don't accept that their axioms are just assumptions, and use that stick to whack everyone else over the head.