352 RELIGION, MORALITY, FAITH, AND REASONDefinition 5b: E is a personal explanation of P only if E has the
form Agent A so acted as to bring about P’s truth
condition.
Definition 6: T is an available theory if and only if T is a
proffered unfalsified relevant explanation of
explication-eligible facts.
Definition 6a: F is an explanation-eligible fact if and only if Fact
F obtains is logically contingent, known to be true,
and is possibly explicable.
Definition 6b. Theory T is unfalsified if and only if we have
examined explanation-eligible facts F such that T is
true is a relevant explanation of F obtains and we have
no reason to think that after rigorous examination T is
false.
Definition 6c. T is proffered if and only if someone offers T.
Attention is limited here to scientific and personal explanations because
they are the sorts of theory relevant here, whether or not there are
other sorts of explanation. While sometimes a scientific community
keeps a theory it knows or has good reason to think false – continues to
teach it to students and construct experiments suggested by the theory
- this is like driving an oil-burning, gas-guzzling car because one hasn’t
access to a better one. Only explanations someone actually thinks of can
be assessed, so we are inherently limited to actually proffered theories,
though since one can proffer theories by thinking them up this
limitation need not be suffocating. Confirmationism and
falsificationism are theories about theory assessment. They provide
different answers to the question: how can we rationally assess
available, relevant, unfalsified theories? Each is a complex theory, but a
brief account will be useful here.
A light touch on confirmationism
Confirmationism at its core holds that: If P entails Q and Q is true, then
P is supported by Q. This apparently simple core doctrine is
unfortunately more complex than it seems. First, the argument form (If
P then Q; Q; Hence: P) is invalid; it commits the fallacy of affirming the
consequent. If it were proper reasoning, one could prove oneself a
billionaire by arguing If I have a billion pounds, then I have at least a
pound; I have at least a pound; hence I have a billion pounds but would
be distressed by the result of If I weigh a billion pounds then I weigh at