Theory on Everything 

I have many theories. I am often criticised for having theories that I am unable to research myself or find the data to back them up. Interestingly, I am also criticised for raising some theories and questioned why I would believe such a thing. I always welcome criticism as it helps me develop and question my ideas and raise more questions to further the path. However, this particular line of criticism raises another theory.

The theory is:

The people that question theories asking for proof and attacking my beliefs may not understand what a theory is or be conflating belief and theory as one and the same.

A theory is a supposition that attempts to explain something through a set of principles or rules. This means that it is conjecture, speculation a hypothesis. Not a fact, but could be. Let's test it.

A belief however is something that is not known as fact but used as a truth. The acceptance of an unknown as true. Not a fact, but could be. No need to test because it is accepted as truth already.

Slightly different. Perhaps significantly so in practice.

Now, most of my theories are observational through my own day to day experiences. This doesn't make them beliefs still as I do not think them true. Just theories. It is possible to think that there may be a legitimate rule of explanation, even act as if that it is the case and still hold the understanding that the rule may not be true. In many cases, it may actually be acting on the best information available as it is possible that no one has had the theory, let alone looked into it scientifically. Which brings me to the next point.

I can have a theory on something but lack the resources to adequately test said theory. For many theories, it is often impossible for one to test personally as in for example my case, I am not a scientist of any sort, I have nowhere near the money or access to the equipment, funds or human resources required to test most of them. Plus, many of my theories may just not be a valid question at this time of the world.

Can you identify a Finn overseas by how they walk? I think I can but honestly, it is not a perfect science. Yet.

See, theories are just questions with a crude attempt to explain them, not answer them. It opens doors for more rigorous scientific testing to take place if anyone that came across the theory both could and cared enough to investigate. The theory may actually give a first steps path of inquiry or on deeper analysis, there may be better ways to question it. But, as said, you can't test a theory you don't know about.

Theories put it out there and without it out there, the people with the resources and funding sit in their office twiddling thumbs waiting for inspiration to strike. I have a theory on inspiration strikes too. Okay, they may not be completely idle but it is always good to give them a pool of topics to choose to study. Get a little spread other than the research scientists continually questioning why they can't find a partner that accepts them, and their 11 cats. That is obviously fact. I have the research to back it up somewhere... look over there, a bird.

What I do find though is sometimes when a theory of mine is criticized, I double down and fight for it. In retrospect, I think fighting for something you don't believe in is silly. And, fighting for something you do believe in is silly too. If what you believe is truth, than it is not a belief it just is. A fight for truth may be a worthy fight, if there is such a thing. My theory is there isn't a worthy fight, but every discussion is valuable.

I think the increase in defence for a non-believed theory is looking for validation as intelligent or something of the sort. It feels like if a personal idea on a topic is attacked, it is an attack on intelligence. It is not. Some very, very smart people in this world have got some things very, very wrong.

Theories are created based on the knowledge held and an expectation of the consistency of that knowledge. Will the knowledge change in the future. As knowledge is always limited, very few theories pan out to be total truth. At least, not in the original form of the theory. As more data are gathered, the theory will evolve and mature and if lucky, find a truth.

At that point, the theory dies completely and the truth kicks its dead carcass to the curb wondering how there was ever even a question in the first place. Truths seem so obvious once found but it is because we quickly forget the path of theories that led to our limited enlightenment.

I have a theory about the way I create theories.

It is better to have many wrong theories than a few wrong beliefs.

Taraz
[ a Steem original ]