[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Falsifiability, was Re: orion dss and rabbis

On Wed, 1 Oct 1997, fred cryer wrote:

> It appears that Popper hasnīt got to Duke after all. Falsifiability as a
> criterion means that, to qualify as a theory, an assertion has in principle
> to be falsifiable. Since Stephen contrives his own Essenes, and has
> knowledge of Pharisee theology prior to the historical documents of
> Pharisaic discussion, I understand perfectly how he can claim that pesher
> Nahum coheres with these views. But it does not seem to me that anything is
> being asserted that is capable of falsification. Sort of like the claim the
> pesher Nahum was written by little green men from Arcturus, which is
> likewise unfalsifiable on present evidence...

I cannot help wondering if any of F. Cryer's opinion (on DSS or other
academic issues) are falsifiable on present evidence. If yes, why does he
hold them? If no, same question. The theories which on present evidence
can be falsified have a shorter name - they are false. 

	Best,	Asia Lerner