“Theoretical models can be of great value even if they are never
supported by empirical testing.” As Kevin and David argued in the article,
social sciences are different from hard sciences, and not every academic field
has to be operated by hypothetico-deductivism. People have been emphasizing on
the importance of individuality for a long time, especially in the US. It
should also apply to the importance of individual academic field as well;
individual academic field also should be respected with the aspect that each
field has its own criteria just like each human being has its own character and
behavior. The term 'social science,’ is itself a study of society and people
living in the society. Human nature and behavior are different, so shouldn't
its study be?
Kevin and David mentioned that the analysis of empirical data can be
valuable even if it doesn't prove any theoretical model. In my opinion, some of
those empirical data will eventually form a scientific theory one day as a deductive
way of scientific method. Einstein once said, "No amount of
experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.”
Thus, it is reasonable to say that hypothetico-deductivism, which proves
theories by experimenting, isn’t yet a perfect scientific way and isn’t yet the
only scientific method. Empirical data is important, therefore, ruling out every
empirical data only because it doesn’t prove any theoretical model is seriously
dangerous way of thinking as a scientist.
