Final answer:
Philosophers contending the falsificationist position hold that theories are only discarded when the 'hard core' is falsified and that auxiliary hypotheses can protect these core propositions. The philosophical discourse also involves understanding different theories of truth and the criterions for falsifying scientific hypotheses.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question you've asked pertains to the falsificationist position in philosophical discourse and how some philosophers have contested it. Specifically, the contesting position asserts that: a) theories are discarded only when their 'hard core' of propositions are falsified, and b) a 'belt' of auxiliary hypotheses protect the fundamental 'hard core' propositions of a theory. This suggests that a scientific theory is not simply refuted upon falsification of any part but rather when the central assumptions are disproven. Additionally, auxiliary hypotheses can be adjusted to protect the core propositions, thus presenting a layered defense against falsification.
Furthermore, philosophical debate extends to various theoretical views on truth, including instrumentalism, realism, and conceptual relativism, which correspond to different methods of confirming empirical claims. However, a major criticism of some theories, akin to those of Sigmund Freud, is that they are not falsifiable. This is essential in distinguishing scientific hypotheses from non-scientific ones. Skeptical hypotheses challenge justification in belief, proposing that without conclusively ruling out counter possibilities, beliefs may not be justified. This all underlines the complexity and vigor of epistemological discussions in philosophy.