Generalizations like “I’m always late.” can be challenged by subjecting them to another technique inspired by science known as the falsifiability principal which maintains that for an idea, a question, or information to be scientifically valid there should be conditions that can prove it false. Statements that require an exhaustive search of all conditions are generally not considered scientific. Take for example the proposition that fire breathing dragons exist. Since such beings do not exist, the best result that one could hope for when investigating is a continuous lack of evidence. No matter how meticulously we search, the possibility remains that fire breathing dragons do exist, but we are just not looking in the right places. Categorically disproving such a claim is nearly impossible, and consequently a proposition that cannot be falsified such as “fire breathing dragons exist” is not considered scientific.
On the other hand, a statement that can be definitively proven wrong is considered to be scientific. A classic example is the statement “All swans are white” all that is necessary for this statement to be disproven is the citing of a black swan – which actually first when Dutch explorer Willem de Vlamingh first saw black swans in 1697 while navigating a waterway which became known as the Swan River in Western Australia. In the practice of Naturalistic Humanism, the technique of making statements that are falsifiable has considerable value as well, particularly when challenging sweeping generalizations.
Sometimes we will think about ourselves in vague terms. We may have a feeling about not being adequately equipped for a particular challenge. For example, let’s imagine that Laura an engineering consultant was selected to make a presentation that her colleagues had success with, but which three of her own clients declined. The prospect of having another client pass fills Laura with self-doubt and feelings of inadequacy as she thinks “I just can’t convince anyone of anything” or “People don’t take me seriously”
Applying Naturalistic Support, instead of allowing such thoughts to ruminate and debilitate us, we can reframe them by applying the principal of falsifiability. This involves stopping and asking “Is what I’m telling myself true?” Specifically, can Laura accurately make the statement “I can’t convince anyone of anything?”
Few people could. There are numerous times throughout most people’s lives when we are decisively influential and this is also true for Laura. Testing the declaration “I can’t convince anyone of anything” inevitably leads to Laura remembering events such as when she managed to persuade her close friend to join her on a trip to Europe, or even when she convinced her current employer that she was the right person for the job. For Laura the statement “I can’t convince anyone of anything” is unequivocally false. And with each example that falsifies that premise, Laura is reminded of aspects of herself that she has momentarily forgotten.
Reconnecting to these accurate facts about herself helps Laura recognize that she can meet her present challenge. To derive the full benefit of the exercise, once Laura has some examples that falsify her “I can’t convince anyone of anything” statement, she can record her answers. Should such self-critical thoughts re-emerge her list will be useful to her in the future.
Another example of how making a falsifiable statement can be valuable involves Dwayne. Dwayne needs to assemble a dresser and he is finding it difficult to follow the confusing drawings in the instruction manual. Dwayne is professor, spending most of his time reading, writing, and teaching, not putting together furniture. He can hear himself saying “I don’t even know why I’m trying, I’m just not handy.”
Putting aside that being “handy” is a vague notion to begin with, this example is relevant because it is often in just such nebulous terms that we diminish ourselves. If Dwayne tries to express his thought as a falsifiable statement he might posit “I have never done anything that involves being handy.” On first consideration Dwayne might think that the statement holds up, but being handy is a relative term.
While Dwayne may not consider himself the most dexterous person, he can recall painting a friend’s apartment, setting up his aunt’s Wi-Fi, and jump starting a car, while carefully avoiding contact between the positive and negative cables.
Like Laura, if Dwayne makes a list of examples of him being competent in ways he sometimes overlooks, it will be beneficial.
Whenever we don’t feel up to a task we might try making a blanket statement like – “I have never been able to cook anything” If we ask ourselves “Is that really true?” most of us would find that there are numerous exceptions — “Well, I can fry an egg…Oh, and I have made tuna salad…and grilled cheese too…”
Making a falsifiable statement can even be helpful as one reflects on being late. If doing so enables you to recognize that there are some events for which you do manage to be punctual, it could help you better understand what you do differently when you’re not. Falsifiable statements can also be useful when we think about others. Going from feeling that your brother never listens to you to questioning “Is it really accurate that my brother has never taken my advice?” can provide valuable insight. Listing the exceptions which falsify a sweeping declaration can help support a more nuanced appreciation of ourselves and others and help us venture into doing things we might otherwise avoid