Prediction is the based of theory.

Maybe its right, maybe not.

that's not falsifiable

But if someone has a good reason ( the prediction worked int he past) then it has strong reason for valid hypothesis.

Which is also the basis of simulation theory.

@Deleted User I lol'd (again), but his person is might be my adopted son, so be nice. Also, good to see you back friend.

the falsifiable meme is uniquely autistic

There are even good reason why Karl Popper's idea is wrong.

I didn't even need to get into it.

lets hear it

Why would I, waste of KJs.

Why, are you busy?

It's just so... extensive.

Google it.

Maybe tomorrow.

I explain too much on this server. I'm on my break.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability#Criticisms

🦆

Haha

This wiki is okay for doing the criticisms.

As you can see there is like 10 parts.

wikipedia is underrated, you can go as deep as you want with their references

Meh

It's not 'deep as you want' but if you are a lazy fuck its OK

Just dont tell the nazi's I said that.

just don't use it for a conclusion

It's a good start

I like Karl Popper.

it can get you in the right path but you need to be using actual material for any real conclusion

He is really good.

But he makes mistakes.

wikipedia is just an aggregate

That is the most painful part of studying philosophy.

I didn't have much of a father, and I put high hope in powerful idea.

Nietzsche was my first nigger dad.

All jizz and no caress.

Who would you say is your favourite thinker

The most eye opening person

Hmmm...

only the technocrat himself

My favourite is not necessarily the best philospher.