There is no such thing as a direct observation of the world. All of the observations we make of the world depend on theories about the information perceived through our senses. [Empricists](Empiricism.md) say that all of our knowledge comes from what we observe about the world. In a sense they are right—we must have some basis of testing theories against our observations to determine accuracy—but it is also incomplete. [Empiricists](Empiricism), at least those expounding the theories during the enlightenment period, believed we can _directly_ test our theories when this is in fact not the case. It always requires *additional theories* from which to extract observations during our experiments. One example of a theory-laden observation is found in the story of the discovery of Neptune. This is part of the reason that [[Neptune's discovery is the epitome of science]]. When many disparate theories come together to corroborate their explanations of reality, and none are falsified ([[Good Scientific Theories Must be Falsifiable]]), this constitutes the confidence scientists have of their correctness. Over time, I predict that humans will continue to update, refine, and reuse existing *good* theories in addition to inventing new ones to control the universe with greater precision; [[Scientific theories are powerful]]. [[In good explanations, all details play a functional role in their explanatory power]]. # Relevant Texts * [[The Logic of Scientific Discovery]] * [[The Beginning of Infinity]] # Related Topics * [[Duhem–Quine Thesis]] # Relevant Philosophers * [[Karl Popper]] * [[David Deutsch]] * [[Pierre Duhem]] * [[Willard Van Orman Quine]]