[tacticalogic]

Absent anything that appears to answer the question of how to test dogma, I'm going to submit that it cannot be tested.

This puts us at a situation of tension between dogma and observation, and while it is given that either one may be in error that appears to be of little consequence, since only observation is testable and even if it passes can be held suspect due to the "observer problem".

[cornelis]

I have the feeling that you are doing something like this:

1. Observation is testable.
2. Dogma is not observation.
3. If dogma is testable, it would be observable.
4. Therefore dogma is untestable.

But dogma that is formulated from observation is obviously testable. The key point here is that there are kinds of dogma. If you define dogma such that it can't be tested, there's no need for any logical hoopla.

This reminds me of another one:

1. tacticalogic is always right
2. if tacticalogic is wrong, see #1