Falsifiability

Overview

A meaningful empirical claim must specify what observations would refute it. Claims that resist all possible refutation are not science — they are unfalsifiable belief. Formalized by Karl Popper (1934): science progresses not by accumulating confirmations but by surviving rigorous attempts at falsification. More-specific claims are more falsifiable; ad-hoc modifications that explain away failures destroy a claim's scientific status.

Composes with confirmation-bias (falsifiability is the structural counter), abductive-reasoning (generates hypotheses; this skill tests them), bayesian-reasoning, critical-thinking.

When to Use

• Designing OKRs, KPIs, or strategic goals; writing or evaluating investment theses
• Designing experiments (A/B tests, product hypotheses, market entry)
• Evaluating consultant/advisor recommendations or diagnosing vague leadership claims
• Someone says "what would change your mind," "how would you know you're wrong," "Popper"
• Stress-testing an AI/AGI hype claim ("AGI is near," "the model truly understands," "our AI adoption is working") — demand what evidence would disprove the capability or safety claim

Not when: genuinely non-empirical (philosophical, ethical, aesthetic); test cost exceeds its value.

Coaching Novices (Adaptive Front Door)