I like to get everyone's thoughts on this.
I've already said that my type of science fiction involves thought experiments, which would include intellectual discussions. One issue going through the genre is the nature of a Creator - call him "God" if you will - and how religion and science interact. And a related problem that comes through is the issue of falsifiability - in other words, if a miracle happens, it's the work of the Creator, as opposed to some unknown scientific phenomenon. So an atheist would say, "No, that's not a miracle; it's just physics in action." So, no matter what, the atheist would say that.
This then cannot be falsified, because, the atheist can always say that. And, yes, the same would be true of the believer - theist - who would say there is a higher power, regardless of the evidence or lack thereof. I've gone through this debate many times during my college years, and it's something I want to bring to my writing.
Here is my question, then.
If my character says, "Yes, but that it cannot be falsified, because, no matter what we say, you'll say that." That would refer to the "falsifiability hypothesis" by Karl Popper, which I learned about as an undergrad. There's also the "verifiability hypothesis", which is the flip side of falsification. Anyway, if and when this episode is shown, on streaming or cinema, the audience will quickly look it up on the internet - this is known as the "second screen phenomenon", which means, even as they watch TV, they use their laptops to figure the background behind the story.
How does that help or hurt my story? By the way, thanks for helping me in my previous posts.
I've already said that my type of science fiction involves thought experiments, which would include intellectual discussions. One issue going through the genre is the nature of a Creator - call him "God" if you will - and how religion and science interact. And a related problem that comes through is the issue of falsifiability - in other words, if a miracle happens, it's the work of the Creator, as opposed to some unknown scientific phenomenon. So an atheist would say, "No, that's not a miracle; it's just physics in action." So, no matter what, the atheist would say that.
This then cannot be falsified, because, the atheist can always say that. And, yes, the same would be true of the believer - theist - who would say there is a higher power, regardless of the evidence or lack thereof. I've gone through this debate many times during my college years, and it's something I want to bring to my writing.
Here is my question, then.
If my character says, "Yes, but that it cannot be falsified, because, no matter what we say, you'll say that." That would refer to the "falsifiability hypothesis" by Karl Popper, which I learned about as an undergrad. There's also the "verifiability hypothesis", which is the flip side of falsification. Anyway, if and when this episode is shown, on streaming or cinema, the audience will quickly look it up on the internet - this is known as the "second screen phenomenon", which means, even as they watch TV, they use their laptops to figure the background behind the story.
How does that help or hurt my story? By the way, thanks for helping me in my previous posts.