Is Dialectical Materialism falsifiable...

Is Dialectical Materialism falsifiable? Is there some kind of experiment I can do in my room or some kind of math I can evaluate that can act as evidence for the validity of Dialectical Materialism as a science?

Are there any books or readings (or just you writing your own explanation) that focus on the mechanical, scientific parts of Dialectical Materialism and how to use it today?

nah, and that's the thing with all social science:
social science isnt real science

if you look up the definition of science, its basically repeatability, that is all it is, you repeat a thing under lab conditions and it happens x out of x times, and if it doesn, the thing is false
math for example, while not a science, has the same zero bullshit policy, 2 and 2 are always 4, all out of all times you add them up it is always 4

social "science" hasnt even uncovered ANY laws or rules or principles or theorems or theories or anything
it is absolutely random, % based, worthless, unscientific, opinion/feeling based, politically charged
it can predict nothing, it can do nothing useful, it can model nothing, it can theorize nothing, you can never be wrong as a social scientist because you can always bullshit your way out of a false prediction, you can always excuse yourself and you can always get away with being wrong

same with art and philosophy and literature and all these other quasi intellectual bullshit, it contains zero proofs, zero evidence, it passes zero tests, it predicts zero things, it is fundamentally
worthless
a waste of one's extremely limited time

t. freshman studying mechanical engineering or πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§computer scienceπŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§

calm down Russell

t. ad hominem faggit

you cant refute what i said, social science is not even scientific and just uses the fame and reputation of the word science, and we all know math and hard/physical/natural sciences gave it all of that fame and credibility, social science theories and predictions are near worthless

when it comes to art and philosophy and literature and all that other πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§intellectualπŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ bullshit, again, zero solid laws, zero reliability, zero meaningfulness, zero predictive/theoretical power, zero use, just fucking worthless

most if not all of human condition and experience can be explained in terms of (organic) chemistry, genetics, and evolutionary/survival urges

all else is literal unemployable spooks

Here you go

I know you just started your STEM career this semester or the last and you are excited and feeling smart. But chill out man, by acting like a stem biggot you are just conforming to the social facts of your area you and making sociology more credible.

Please read a book, or at least take a intro philosophy course holy fuck

they are just hobby shit at best, not a serious intellectual or academic pursuit, and it really shows when you look at (the lack of) their industrial, or military, or economic, or ANY applications to anything
they just fucking suck, they are unreliable and do not deliver anything solid
they are worthless

the only reason they can even exist, is because of overproduction from the actually solid, reliable, delivering, ACTUAL sciences that USE MATH to do their thing

when it comes to arts and philosophies and whatnot, math is the only one acceptable because while you cant poke it with a stick (much like all of social science and other quasi intellectual stuff), all of material world for some reason nods in approval of it, or follows the rules and reasons mathematics provide
that is the only non-physical thing out there, worth pursuing
mathematics

all else delivers nothing, it just spends extremely limited time and resources
all outside mathematics and the physical world of atoms and quarks and so on,
is spooks

/r/ing that screencap of why Marxism is scientific

This is an unfalsifiable, and thus unscientific claim since it enters the field of social sciences because it's about the usefulness of social and hard sciences to society
This is also an unfalsifiable, and thus unscientific claim since it enters the field of social sciences because it's about the usefulness of social and hard sciences to society
This is also an unfalsifiable, and thus unscientific claim since it enters the field of social sciences because it's about the usefulness of social and hard sciences to society
This is also an unfalsifiable, and thus unscientific claim since it the field of social sciences because it's about the usefulness of social and hard sciences to society
This is also an unfalsifiable, and thus unscientific claim since it enters the field of social sciences because it's about the usefulness of social and hard sciences to society
This is also an unfalsifiable, and thus unscientific claim since it enters the field of social sciences because it's about the usefulness of social and hard sciences to society
This is also an unfalsifiable, and thus unscientific claim which uses a concept adopted from Hegelianism, an especially obscurantist and unscientific strain of philosophy.

could you not.

You're a goddamn fucking moron. You genuinely have no idea what the fuck kind of retarded idiotic phrases are dribbling from your goddamn worthless mouth. Fuck your cunt you shit eating cockstorm and eat a dong fucking ass ramming shit fuck eat penises in your fuck face and shit out abortions of fuck and shit in your ass you cock fuck shit monkey fuck ass wanker from the depths of shit.

Why are all of you faggots falling for this shitty troll?

hey bb, could you run an experiment on whether torture is ever justified? thanks.
also, could you make a quick experiment that proves that your method of obtaining said conclusion produces conclusions that are true regardless of time period and culture?
thanks :*

let's do some falsifiable anthropology.

theory: anonymous is a cunt
proof: just fucking look at him
falsifiable if: he proves he's not a cunt

now let's repeat the test.

theory: anonymous is a cunt
sample: just fucking look at him
falsified? no, he's still a cunt.


HMMMMMMMMMmmMMMMMmmMMmMmMm

DO NOT SUMMON ANAL WATER. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT SUMMON THAT INSUFFERABLE PSEUD.

Back to plebbit with you.

that's not an ad hominem you fucking retard

No.
No.
Probably, but you'll just come off like a worse fool than the very people who write those books.

Repeat after me: You are not the one that takes history by the reigns by doing or willing anything in a vacuum, it is history which posits the conditions of dissolution, and until those conditions arise you as an individual are powerless against the force of history as material or ideal.

We know everything in the universe changes, so yes.

Uh, it can make predictions that can be observed like theoretical physics.


The tendency of the rate of profit to fall, for example.

Also observable facts and pointing them out is deductive reasoning.

Like there's forms of property that make profit and forms that don't. We can deduce shit from. These facts you fucking dipshit, lmao.

Does everything in the universe change? If so, then yes, DiaMat is entirely falsifiable.

the basis of science is empirical analysis and experiment, social science allow to learn a lot about society and human organization, which is the most deciding factor of human life.
kys retard