This document discusses the philosophical approaches of falsificationism and verificationism in scientific inquiry. Falsificationism, proposed by Karl Popper, argues that theories should be aimed to falsify rather than verify through testing falsifiable hypotheses. Verificationism assumes theories are validated through accumulating confirming evidence. The document argues falsificationism is more ethical as it aims to eliminate bias and uncover overlooked truths by exploring alternatives rather than defending existing paradigms. It provides an example of using falsificationism to determine the correct rule describing a numerical pattern by attempting to falsify each proposed explanation.

1. Selected References
Parry, J. (2005). Must scientists think
philosophically about science? In
Philosophy and the science of exercise,
health and sport: Critical perspectives on
research methods (pp. 21–33). Routledge
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific
revolutions (1st ed.). Chicago: University
Magee, B. (1973). Popper. London: Fontana.
Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and
refutations. London: Routledge.
Contact
marshall.milbrath@unco.edu
Faculty Sponsor: Maria Lahman, Ph.D.
Background
Research ethics gives much attention to
participant treatment and the truthful reporting
of scientific findings. However, ethical duty
begins prior to this with the inception of the
research purpose as this can influence how
results are interpreted.
Thomas Kuhn (1962) noted the process of
science involves the defense of accepted
paradigms through verification during repeated
investigations. A group approved framework of
understanding is defended until irreconcilable
anomalies are identified causing reexamination
of the paradigm.
Karl Popper (1963) argued science should
base inquiry in creative ideas and aim to falsify
them rather than verify them. Failing to reject a
hypothesized stance does not give evidence
that an explanation is true, but gives evidence
that it is not false. Many explanations coexist
for discussion and debate.
Falsificationism
Assumptions
• Scientific knowledge finds validity in the
ability for a theory to be disproven
• Research is a creative, exploratory process
where theories are created and challenged.
• Countless confirming instances can never
conclusively verify a general proposition
when a single counter-example can falsify it
Characteristics
• Multiple explanations coexist for discussion
and debate of the scientific community
• Theories are eliminated only when they are
falsified
Method of Inquiry
1. Reexamine existing theory or expectation
2. Proposal of a new theory
3. List of testable propositions from the new
theory
4. Attempted refutations
5. Preference established between competing
theories
Ethical Implications
• Research ethics obligates presentation of
purest research findings and knowledge
• Limiting research purposes to verification of
prior theories creates research bias and
risks overlooking alternate explanations
• To best present truth, scientists must break
away from biases that are resultant of
adopted beliefs and exclusive experiences
• Engaging in investigations that aim to falsify
hypotheses serves as a counteraction of
conscious and unconscious bias
• If truth is overlooked in an accepted
paradigm, falsificationism increases the
likelihood of discovering these overlooked
truths as alternate explanations are not
consciously or unconsciously dismissed.
Falsification in Practice
The following numerical observations are
presented:
{1, 9, 25, 49, 81, 121, 169, 225}
You must come up with a rule that describes
these observations understanding. You find
three relationships:
A. Ni=xi
2 example: 25=52
B. Ni=xi-1+(si-1*8) example: 25=9+(2*8)
C. Numbers in ascending order
Where: N= number in sequence
x = number from which n is derived
s = position in sequence
You later find that only Explanation “C” is
“correct.” This could be solved by attempting
to find fault with each pattern, with each
falsification eliminating it as a viable solution.
Marshall J. Milbrath, M.Ed
University of Northern Colorado, Department of Sport and Exercise Science
Failure to Reject: Falsificationism and the Advancement of Scientific Knowledge:
An Ethical Stance
Verificationism
Assumptions
• Scientific knowledge is validated through
inductively assembling observations into
inferences and theories
• Research is rooted in the investigation of
expected results to better explain a theory
• Continually confirming expected
observations verifies a theory with increasing
conclusiveness.
Characteristics
• A truer explanation to a phenomenon may be
masked behind an expected observation
• Masked explanations are revealed slowly as
irreconcilable anomalies are identified
Method of Inquiry
1. Observation of a phenomenon
2. Experimental replication
3. Inductive generalization
4. Hypothesize an explanation for the
generalization
5. Attempted verification of the hypothesis
6. Proof or disproof of hypothesis
7. Knowledge
Constructing Understanding through Opposite Approaches
Scientists adopt attitudes derived from basic beliefs that have
the power to shape the way the scientific process is viewed,
even in the basic practice of observation. (Perry, 2005)