Scientific theories explain the various aspects of the universe, and the natural world is usually verified using observation, quantification, and evaluation according to the Scientific method. When a scientific theory can consistently be proven to be true, it becomes a scientific fact and is consistently proven to be true according to empirical evidence (Feynman, 1964).
A Scientific fact is proven with empirical evidence in addition to objective realism. The scientific method relies on philosophy, which facilitates the construction and evaluation of the arguments. This is quite different from common sense, which is a thought that learns and believes without the need for reflection and hesitation and is often referred to as second nature.
Scientific theories facilitate the answering of various philosophical questions through reasonable correction from assumptions making them plausible. It is important to note that an argument can be considered valid or invalid through the logical form. If a scientific theory cannot be proven true, it can also be rationally persuasive, giving the individual a good reason to think it may be true.
This, however, cannot assume that the theory is a scientific fact. A good argument needs to be rationally persuasive if it is good enough to lead to factually true conclusions. Richard Feynman argues that for an argument to be considered a scientific fact, it needs to be stated, considering its implication, and applying empirical evidence to determine if it is true. According to this argument, a good argument can be false and thus unscientific.
Validity of Scientific Theories
The validity of scientific theories can be determined depending on the probability of them being true or false. However, if a scientific theory cannot be proven right, it does not mean that it is factually wrong. It is also important to note that a scientific theory can be drawn from considering the consequences of a scientific fact. These scientific theories require empirical evidence for them to be considered scientific facts. The argument of a scientific theory can also be considered deductively invalid when the premise, often other scientific facts, are true but the conclusions made are wrong.
For an argument to be considered for scientific evaluation, it has to be probably true. This can occur depending on the premises and conclusion. For a Scientific theory to be rationally acceptable if the argument used in its formulation has both true beliefs and leading to a true conclusion. If the premise is not true and the conclusion is also true, then it is possible that the theory and possibly the argument to be true (Toulmin, 1953). It is important to note that the argument has to be supported by objective realism to be considered in the formulation of a scientific theory. The validity of a scientific method depends on whether it is plausible or even true.
Additionally, if a scientific theory cannot be proven true, it does not mean that it is false. The validity of the theory improves as the probability of it being true increases. Rationality is the state or quality of a belief conforming with reason. Logic is of fundamental essence to the evaluation of instrumental rationality and rational manner. On the other hand, irrationality is acting, talking, thinking, and cognition considering reason. In this case, it would be rather irrational to consider scientific theories cannot be proven true or shown to be probably true. It is also irrational to accept what any scientific theory says about the world (Toulmin, 1953).
Feynman, R. (1964). Scientific Method [Video]. Retrieved 8 October 2021, from
Toulmin, S. (1953). The philosophy of science (p. 107). London: Hutchinson.