Theory Versus Opinion

Theory versus Opinion

Characteristics of a good scientific theory is that it must be testable i.e. make predictions and falsifiable. For a scientific theory to be tested it needs a null hypothesis – what needs to be tested and a control. Simply put, control is a standard for comparison where the experimental treatment is omitted – a placebo (inactive object or substance). Finally there must be variables: i) independent (affecting something), and ii) dependent (affected by the independent variable). An opinion on the other hand is a view about something without fact or knowledge. An opinion is a conjecture usually based on a set of beliefs of a large number or a majority of people about an issue largely based on intuition rather than true knowledge (Carr & Kemmis, 1986; Neuman, 2003).

Because people often form an opinion over a period of time and based on experiences, it is often difficult to differentiate opinion from theory which is factual. Over the years, philosophers have grappled with the paradoxes of differentiating between theory and conjecture or opinion – a branch of philosophy known as epistemology (Carr & Kemmis, 1986). Epistemology deals with the limits of human knowledge relative to facts. It is a fact that most of modern science as we know it has its foundation in discerning information (theory) from opinions, which often time may or may not be factual – this of course follows a strict and tested methodology that has to be replicable (p. 136).

The complex nature of theories suggests that they have to stand the test of time because facts may, in time, be proven wrong. A good example is in Astrology and the surface of the earth being thought to be flat for centuries. We now know that the earth is in fact round proving that theories can and should always remain challenged to allow for philosophical discovery and development of new gap filling knowledge. It should be noted however, that even though a methodology may appeal...