The Right to Be Wrong

Karl Popper wrote, "The wrong view of science betrays itself in the craving to be right." In fact, this is the essential point of his model and it goes to the heart of human experience. Whatever opinion we hold, we naturally believe it to be right (or else we would hold another opinion, one closer to the truth). But more than that, we want our beliefs to be right. We often have a great deal invested in our beliefs; to change them is often traumatic.

Popper upheld the value of metaphysics, which he meant to encompass all ideas that are not empirically verifiable. In contrast to the logical positivists, however, he, did not thereby think that such ideas are nonsensical or irrational. Quite the contrary. Popper credited metaphysics--and even some pseudosciences such as astology and alchemy--with providing the basis out of which science emerged and can be carried on. Metaphysical concepts may not be scientifically verifiable but they are meaningful and (importantly) may be criticized.

So where does falsifiability fit in? The proper use of this tool is not to differentiate natural science from other types of worthwhile intellectual activity but to discipline natural scientists not to be afraid of failure.