You can turn every empirical theory into a so-called "reductio ad absurdum" by phrasing the results of empirical tests as a premise in the argument, but that is itself totally absurd and a mockery of the logical idea.
replyIt's not a mockery—that is precisely at the core of scientific method. Theory makes predictions (logical implications), and if you empirically find contradictory evidence, the theory is proven incorrect.
reply> Theory makes predictions (logical implications), and if you empirically find contradictory evidence, the theory is proven incorrect.
replyOf course. But again, that is not the form of argumentation known as reductio ad absurdum.
Reductio ad absurdum is not at the core of scientific method. Reductio ad absurdum is used for example in pure, nonempirical mathematics and geometry, and typically starts by assuming the opposite of the conclusion.