Some people define a set of propositions as science only if they make testable

Some people define a set of propositions as science only if they make testable

Some people define a set of propositions as science only if they make testable (or perhaps falsifiable) predictions, and those preditions are verified. Is that a good working definition of science? If not, how do philosophers distinguish scientific claims about the world from non-scientific claims? (This question comes up in the current controversy over whether Intelligent Design is science.)

Read another response by Peter Lipton, Alexander George
Read another response about Science
Print