Falsifiability is a stupid criterion

[Categories+Sheaves]

Truth as a concept is often taken as absolute while truth in practice (and especially so in science) is often an approximation. Falsifiability and verification, like any tools, have pros and cons... ...As far as how people perceive science and truth, there are probably plenty of people that think science is saying "this is completely true" when it's more akin to "this isn't completely wrong"...lol.

It is an amusing thing to ponder over though, the times we've gotten the answer right and the steps wrong, steps right-answer wrong, or whether or not any of these tools we use are actually good at what they do -or we just happen to be incredibly lucky- stumbling upon "the answers" while we hold onto tools which aren't actually doing anything at all.

I'm on an Asus surf in a hotel that has shitty internet, so I'm holding off on writing a more thorough response until I'm back home with a real computer.
But a sketchy response:
-It's not so much that unexamined presuppositions are a problem, it's that they play an integral part of how we conduct ourselves, and our holding them doesn't really jive with that falsifiability shtick.
-Beliefs aren't falsifiable on their own; it's only within the context of 'stronger' beliefs/conclusions that hypothesis A can be 'tested' in some sense. Given this, shouldn't we turn our attention towards how aggregates of beliefs function?
-It's convenient that you used the 'building an airplane' example: another part of my beef is that choosing between belief A and belief B(in the case of falsifiability, the choice is between A and not-A) is driven by pragmatism rather than some proximity to the truth of things 'in themselves'. Falsifiability hints at this sort of valuation (Popper wanted 'bold' statements that allowed us to insist that the world behaves in manner A and never Manner B, and doesn't this function as a guarantee that we will have the opportunities afforded by A?) but doesn't go far enough in insisting that the beliefs exist from and in relation to our pragmatic functioning (I'm reaching for Heidegger here...)

bleh cant edit... Gotta go get dinner...