What is your answer?
For a statement to be empirically verifiable,
{ 1 } - some possible observations must be able to prove it conclusively.
{ 2 } - actual observations must show it to be true.
{ 3 } - some possible observations must be able to make it highly probable.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 3.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
For a statement to be empirically verifiable,
{ 1 } - some possible observations must be able to prove it conclusively.
{ 2 } - actual observations must show it to be true.
{ 3 } - some possible observations must be able to make it highly probable.
On this criterion, no universal statement is empirically verifiable.
Take, for example, "All swans are white." No set of observations could prove this conclusively -- since we can never exclude the possible later appearance of a black swan. But some set of observations could make the statement probable.
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
For a statement to be empirically verifiable,
{ 1 } - some possible observations must be able to prove it conclusively.
{ 2 } - actual observations must show it to be true.
{ 3 } - some possible observations must be able to make it highly probable.
This defines "verified" -- not "verifiable."
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is correct!
For a statement to be empirically verifiable,
{ 1 } - some possible observations must be able to prove it conclusively.
{ 2 } - actual observations must show it to be true.
{ 3 } - some possible observations must be able to make it highly probable.
Ayer gave "There are mountains on the other side of the moon" as an example. When he wrote, people couldn't actually test this statement. But still the statement was in principle verifiable, since they could describe possible observations that would make the statement probable.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
the end