Content deleted Content added
Undid revision 856816814 by 168.254.225.79 (talk) |
|||
Line 61:
Discerning between [[science]] and "[[pseudoscience]]" was the theme of a book by [[Karl Popper]] whose summary was quoted in Daubert: "the criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its [[falsifiability]], or refutability, or testability." The book, ''Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge'' (5th ed. 1989), pp. 34–57, explains how psychology is more like astrology than astronomy because it does not make predictions about an individual which are falsifiable. He wrote that "the impressive thing about" Einstein's predictions "is the risk involved...If observation shows that the predicted effect is definitely absent, then the theory is simply refuted." But "it was impossible to describe a human behaviour" which would be accepted as proving psychology false.
The considerations in Daubert do not all have to be met for the evidence to be admitted.
The principle in Daubert was expanded in ''[[Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael]]'' (1999), where the evidence in question was from a technician and not a scientist.
==Pronunciation of ''Daubert''==
| |||