Talk:Closed circle

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophy of science

It is very wrong to equate cyclic arguments with unfalsifiable arguments

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It's true that any cyclic argument is not falsifiable, but it is not the interesting case. More importantly, it is very wrong to use non falsifiable in a derogatory manner. Mathematics and logic are also unfalsifiable. Any way, this article seems to achieve nothing. The link with unfalsifiability is not informative. Dominic Mayers (talk) 02:19, 20 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

This page was redesigned at the edge.

A page that knows where it met you.

Talk:Closed circle

It is very wrong to equate cyclic arguments with unfalsifiable arguments