I have been thinking about asking a summer-silliness question for the past week or so but couldn't seem to find the right one. Eventually during a conversation with someone, I remembered the debate between Susskind and Smolin about the anthropic principle and it's falsifiability. I thought that would make for a great summer-silly question that would without a doubt attract a lot of people as questions containing falsification usually do. However, when searching the site to make sure that wasn't already an asked question I found Mozibur Ullah's well asked question Is the anthropic principle in physics falsifiable? (which I think, regrettably, hasn't received the best answers that it could).

I started to think of ways to ask the question differently so as not to be a duplicate question and still be able to ask a silly philosophical question about the anthropic principle. One that I've come up with is:

Is the anthropic principle verifiable? Would the logical positivists have accepted the principle as a verifiably meaningful statement or would they have dismissed it as tautological?

Mozibur Ullah's question specifically touches on Popper and falsification while mine would touch on the positivists and verificationism, but I wanted to ask meta first if this was too close to the same question to end up posting, even just for the summer-silliness tag.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .