Richard Golian

1995-born. Charles University alum. Head of Performance at Mixit. 10+ years in marketing and data.

Castellano Français Slovenčina

Manage subscription Choose a plan

RSS
Newsletter
New articles to your inbox

Article

Scepticism, Falsifiability and Intellectual Humility

Karl Popper, falsifiability and the illusion of certainty
Richard Golian
Richard Golian · 3 764 reads
Hi, I am Richard. On this blog, I share thoughts, personal stories, findings and what I am working on. I hope this article brings you some value.

Is it better to doubt or to act with determination?

I extend my respect to the moderates and the curious minds amongst us – those who relentlessly seek understanding, whether in the realm of human interactions or in the pursuit of unravelling nature's mysteries. I admire thinkers like Cicero and Erasmus, champions of moderation in an age of emotional beliefs. I would rather listen to a moderate person who tends to doubt than a fanatic. A fanatic seldom tries to understand more deeply; he believes.

However, we must also recognise the significance of those who hold strong beliefs and are determined to act on them. They can change their lives and the world for the better in this way. They wield the power to influence (positively) individuals and entire crowds.

An Argument for Doubt: Scepticism and Falsifiability

This part is a continuation of the post: How I became a child again. I describe there how I began to doubt some things during my university studies.

Richard Golian
Charles University

Challenging erroneous ideas through scepticism brings us closer to true knowledge than any other approach I have encountered thus far. That is why I hold these principles dear:

Continue

Continue reading for free

Enter your email to keep reading for free. This also subscribes you to my monthly newsletter. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.

Summary

Theories can only be disproven, never confirmed. Too much doubt kills action. Too much conviction kills thought. My scepticism began at university, with Cicero and Erasmus. I would still rather listen to a moderate who doubts than a fanatic who believes. But I act with those determined to reach a shared goal.

Common questions on this article's topic

Is it better to doubt or to act with determination?
Neither extreme is ideal. In the article, both are presented as valuable but in different contexts. Doubt brings us closer to truth through scepticism and careful thinking. Determination enables action and change. The synthesis: listen carefully to the moderate and reflective, but act with those who are determined to achieve a common goal.
What is Karl Popper's falsifiability principle?
Popper argued that no theory can be definitively confirmed. It can only be definitively disproven. A theory gains credibility not by accumulating supporting evidence but by surviving rigorous attempts to disprove it. In the article, this principle is listed as one of the core intellectual commitments: evaluate theories based on the possibilities they offer for refutation, not on the certainty they claim.
Why can excessive doubt be harmful?
In the article, it is acknowledged that an insatiable desire for deeper understanding can dampen the zeal for decisive action and erode motivation. This tension is observed both personally and among fellow university students. While intellectual humility is valuable, at some point action is required, and perpetual reflection without commitment can become its own form of paralysis.
Why can excessive conviction be harmful?
Because a fanatic seldom tries to understand more deeply. They believe. In the article, unyielding conviction is described as an obstacle to thinking, alongside the dogma of relativism. The article draws on the tradition of Cicero and Erasmus, both known as champions of moderation, to argue that the best thinkers maintain space for doubt even while acting decisively.
What does it mean that information is always an interpretation?
This principle, rooted in hermeneutic philosophy developed by Gadamer, holds that we never encounter raw information. We always understand it within a context shaped by our prior experience, assumptions, and situation. In the article, this is listed as a core commitment: recognising that all understanding is contextual guards against both naive certainty and corrosive relativism.
How do you choose who to work with?
In the article, the answer is clear: choose determined people. Listen carefully to the moderate and reflective. They sharpen your thinking. But when it is time to act, work with those who share a common goal and are committed to achieving it. Doubt refines the plan. Determination executes it.
What is falsifiability?
Falsifiability is the principle that a theory counts as scientific only if it can, in principle, be proven wrong. A claim that no possible observation could ever refute is not a strong theory but an unfalsifiable one. Introduced by Karl Popper, it shifts the test of knowledge from confirmation to the possibility of refutation.
What is scepticism?
Scepticism is the disciplined habit of questioning claims rather than accepting them on authority or feeling. Philosophical scepticism does not mean believing nothing; it means holding beliefs provisionally and being willing to revise them in the light of better evidence or argument.
Who was Karl Popper and what is critical rationalism?
Karl Popper was a twentieth-century philosopher of science best known for falsificationism, the idea that theories can never be finally proven, only disproven. His broader philosophy, critical rationalism, holds that we make progress by proposing bold conjectures and subjecting them to rigorous criticism, rather than by seeking certainty.
What is fallibilism?
Fallibilism is the view that any of our beliefs could turn out to be mistaken, so no knowledge is ever completely certain or final. It is not the same as relativism; it does not say that all views are equally valid, only that every view remains open to revision in the face of better argument or evidence.
What is relativism, and how does it differ from doubt?
Relativism is the position that truth is only ever relative to a person, culture, or framework, with no shared standard for judging between them. Healthy doubt questions claims in order to get closer to the truth; relativism abandons the idea of truth altogether. One can doubt without relativising.
What is dogmatism?
Dogmatism is holding a belief as beyond question, treating conviction itself as proof. It closes off the possibility of being wrong, which is exactly what scepticism and falsifiability keep open. Both unyielding dogmatism and the dogma of relativism obstruct clear thinking.
Richard Golian

If you have any thoughts, questions, or feedback, feel free to drop me a message at mail@richardgolian.com.

Related articles

The Meaning of Life: What It Means to Me

If I have learned anything from this experience, it is that my life is not driven by something predefined.

23 February 2025·2 122 reads
What is Philosophy? What Did I Actually Study and Why?

Why devote myself to a discipline even its practitioners can’t define?

4 January 2025·2 647 reads
How I became a child again

I ask: “Why?” Mom answers, and I ask again: “Why?” Mommy answers: “Because it is so.”

30 March 2019·7 065 reads

More articles

I Ran Object Detection on My Laptop, and Saw Everything Is Possible

A few weeks ago I installed a small local AI model on my laptop that watches a live camera feed. I turned the webcam on in the dark, and in near total darkness it recognised me and the objects in the room. That such things exist, I have known for a long time. What opened my eyes was the accessibility. I installed it in one prompt, free, and it runs entirely on my machine, sending data nowhere.

15 July 2026·84 reads
Dependent on AI: Are We Still Masters, or Slaves?

I have Heidegger and my notebook beside me. I am asking where all of this is heading, where artificial intelligence is taking us.

21 June 2026·552 reads
Which Work Will AI Not Replace?

Seventy per cent. That is where the first AI output begins, even when you give it the full company context and the best examples from the past. We are talking about the kind of output that cannot be defined programmatically. It is more complex. Often it is creative work. On one repeated type of output I reached eighty per cent within a week. Every further percentage point is harder than the one before.

10 June 2026·522 reads
What is the dead internet theory? Will we return offline?

For a long time we treated the internet as the main road. The place where work and relationships happen. Yet most of what we see on it today is, or soon will be, AI-generated: text, images, profiles and comments. The internet is turning into an online game full of bots, where you cannot be sure that a human is on the other side of anything. So I ask: was the online world the main road, or only a temporary detour that part of us will return from, back offline?

7 June 2026·669 reads
The Gap Between Professionals in the AI Era

A few days ago I interviewed a senior marketer. An experienced man, years of practice. I asked him about AI. He said he barely uses it. He had one bad experience with the output and decided he was too senior for it to add value when it is not perfect. I know the other side too: professionals who automate everything that can be automated.

6 June 2026·627 reads
Europe Is Not Ready for Drone Warfare

Europe does not have the capacity to face a full-scale, mass drone war of the kind we see in Ukraine. Three dependencies weaken it: China supplies the physical material for defence systems, the United States supplies capabilities Europe does not have, and twenty-seven states cannot agree how fast, or who pays. Rearmament plans exist, but they are being carried out slowly.

31 May 2026·592 reads
Can AI Replace Human Judgement?

AI produces the graphic, the newsletter and the product page faster than a person. What is left for the one who used to do it is the judgement, knowing whether the output is good. But most people have worse judgement than AI. And whoever cannot judge quality cannot delegate either. How do you tell whether yours is the judgement a company relies on, or the kind it can replace?

30 May 2026·595 reads
What Determines a Stock Price?

In April, in the first part of this series, I wrote about an AI prediction system I had started building on my own machine. At the time the software was a few hours old and the prediction record was empty. The record since then has shown one thing: the system does not yet understand the market it is being asked to forecast. It can pull macro context, book value, earnings. But it cannot put those together into something that helps it understand the price.

23 May 2026·626 reads
Where the Money Goes When AI Takes the Work: Mapping the AI Economy

Prague, 13 May 2026. On my way to work I started thinking about something that stayed with me for days. If most routine work on a computer disappears in the next ten years, and a large share of repetitive manual work disappears with it, what happens to the flow of money? Who pays whom for what? Which economic layers will exist, how large will they be, and what relationships will run between them? This is the six-layer map I sketched as an answer.

15 May 2026·1 255 reads
Can AI Predict the Stock Market? Building a Calibrated System

I am building an AI system to predict the S&P 500. It runs on my own machine, uses free public data (yfinance, FRED, the Shiller dataset), and grades every forecast against reality. This series documents the build itself: the decisions, the methodology, the mistakes. What I will eventually share from the running system is a separate question, and an honest one.

26 April 2026·2 003 reads
All in on AI agents, or an analogue life.

Four days in Catalonia. No computer, no AI, almost no social media. I bought this notebook so that I could write down what I would think about, and what I would come across and learn on the trip.

10.5.2026·1 101 reads
NEWSLETTER
What I write about, what I am working on, what I learned.
Sent the first Sunday of the month. Unsubscribe anytime.