Why was Cuvier's catastrophism model neither scientific nor a theory?
I am not sure how to answer this.
A: It entirely depends on what we call "theory" and "scientific". According to Karl Popper's philosophy of science, theory and hypothesis are the same thing, they are attempts to explain something. Therefore, catastrophism is a theory. In addition, Popper tell us that by "scientific" we mean empirically testable through search for refutations. Is there any finding which could cause the refutation of the theory? If so, it is scientific.
Click here to post answer.
Return to Hub of Biology Questions and Answers.
give us a tip using crypto
- BTC: 3G1AGoAddUPYaLbTAo6hvKFnt7kNz4dXjz
- ETH: 0x256e8a87ab9c5f879696dadf6cdbd37613d9ffac
- DOGE: DEKXxbY9FFP56y7sdyzBvTSRPbP5h1RU2p
- LTC: MLA9BuoUYK4PKnwxmKR5r1z8f2mKdAa7vf
- XMR: 46k6hLyn4dtWJbABdtt3ms1GnNJSwBG2g9Qjk5DfPgHBhcRpicktW692pYGFiyojttDVEBwAiosyrEMGggGyZPJUM9cwPmx
- USDT: 0x256e8a87ab9c5f879696dadf6cdbd37613d9ffac
- USDC: 0x256e8a87ab9c5f879696dadf6cdbd37613d9ffac