{Theory and Verification [continued (6)]}[19th June 1988]

[Redbook5:176][19880619:1707d]{Theory and Verification [continued (6)]}[19^th June 1988]

19880619.1707

[continued]

*(iv) Does it explain everything that needs to be explained? – arising out of (ii)** above, in terms of (i)*** above. In practical terms, this would mean that it would have to be generally consistent with other fields of knowledge, the subject of more specialised disciplines, or at least indicate how it can refute them where they are inconsistent.****

It is at this stage particularly that one must seek inconsistencies which might falsify the theory.

*[See last previous entry but two, [Redbook5:175-176][19880619:1707]{Theory and Verification [continued (3)]}[18^th June 1988] 'The testing of any 'metaphysical' theory may involve several different approaches:'.]

**[See last previous entry but one, [Redbook5:176][19880619:1707b]{Theory and Verification [continued (4)]}[19^th June 1988]]

***[See last previous entry but two, [Redbook5:175-176][19880619:1707]{Theory and Verification [continued (3)]}[18^th June 1988]]

****Refutation may rest on the use of rationality being 'wider' than [the use of] logic, in some cases.

[continues]

[PostedBlogger04for05072018]