FALLIBILISM

Fallibilism is a philosophical theory that focuses on the uncertainty of the universe. Advocated for by Charles Sanders Perice, John Dewey, and Karl Popper, fallibilism claims that human knowledge is never fully certain. It is important to understand that fallibilism doesn’t imply that we can’t know anything, but rather claims that knowledge is open to discussion and revision.

An example to understand this theory better is scientific theories. While there are many strong scientific theories, as new experiments are conducted and more data is gathered, it can weaken existing theories and revise them to better fit what the data shows. This example demonstrates how the theories, or knowledge, are always open to revision. This theory challenges the very belief of truth: it argues that truth is never final, but fluid and changeable based on new information. Fallibilism relies on correction and inquiry and chastens any arrogant belief that an idea is completely true. It acknowledges the inevitability of human error and advocates for fixing them.

Now, let’s jump into some real world examples of fallibilism. For example, Newton’s physics was replaced by Einstein’s relativity after new proven facts emerged. Similarly, with medical treatments, old medicines were discarded as new knowledge emerged. Historical ideas such as geocentrism are now widely considered as false due to increased studies. In the legal system, wrongful convictions show how our judgements can be erroneous. Finally, in everyday life, you might think your friend is angry at you because of a text but then learn that you misunderstood because of new knowledge that arises.

Some arguments that advocate for fallibilism include the theory that human sense and reasoning are imperfect. Another argument is that there are many philosophies, sciences, and historical facts that have been overturned due to new knowledge. People also praise fallibilism because of advocates for humility and open mindedness and gives room for growth and progress. However, some arguments against fallibilism include that there are some facts that must be fully true. A popular example of this is “I think, therefore I am”. Many critics also argue that fallibilism may result in individuals falling into the slippery slope of over-skepticism. Some also argue that fallibilism makes it hard to make choices confidently.

One related theory includes pragmatism, which was discussed in an earlier blog. Fallibilism and pragmatism are closely related because they both assume that truth is provisional. Another philosophy is critical rationalism, which claims that science advances by trying to prove a theory false rather than true. Finally, there’s epistemic humility, which agrees that individuals have limits in their knowledge and advocates for the awareness of it.