Why theory?

Karl R. Popper, 1980

In his Logic of Scientific Discovery, the philosopher of science Karl Popper writes:

The empirical sciences are systems of theories. One could call epistemology the theory of theories (Popper 1969: 31).

Several aspects correspond to this epistemological understanding of science. For example, modern empirical science, unlike the late medieval scholasticism of figures like Meister Eckhart (Harrington 2018), must proceed in a logically and empirically verifiable manner. Statements can be empirically tested all the more effectively the more universally valid and precisely formulated they are, that is, the higher their empirical content (Popper 1969: 86). Therefore, science strives to develop theories that are as substantial as possible (and thus as easily verifiable as possible).

Scientific puzzles and paradigm shifts relate to questions, concepts, typologies, and explanatory models—in short, theory (from the ancient Greek theoria: intuition, contemplation, knowledge). Accordingly, the dynamics of scientific knowledge acquisition require theories.

Analyzing means cognitively breaking down and reconstructing objects of study according to a framework theory – see, for example, chemical substance analysis according to the periodic table model. Analysis therefore requires not only expertise and suitable investigative methods, but also a knowledge-conducive theoretical framework.

Dynamic theory building presupposes free scientific thinking and communication. Conversely, open theory building therefore stands for effective academic freedom.

The rise of the natural sciences and the enormous technological innovation that followed can be understood as a historical, and at times extremely difficult, process of establishing free theory formation. In the social sciences, particularly political science, theory formation has, by contrast, held only a minor position to this day. Indeed, the prevailing notion is that science should be directly practice-oriented. Thus, Karl Marx's eleventh thesis on Feuerbach—"The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it" (Marx 1845)—still adorns the entrance hall of Humboldt University in Berlin in golden letters—an expression of a profound misunderstanding of what constitutes science in particular.

Online source: Nordbayern.de

Above all, the idea of interdisciplinary, practice-oriented approaches increasingly dominates the funding and structure of the social sciences. Instead of fostering knowledge, the power of those who determine what is feasible is increasingly prevailing; instead of dynamic scientific progress, at best there is piecemeal, praxeological optimization, often bureaucratic stagnation or regression.

This leads to a fatal imbalance: While the natural and technical sciences are developing at a rapid pace and changing the world ever more quickly and profoundly, the political and social sciences are languishing, indeed losing all independence and innovative strength in more and more countries.

Rapid technological progress thus appears merely as a variable of present and future (geopolitical) power; politics is increasingly losing its emancipatory power and sense of responsibility.

In contrast, the theory of civility focuses on gaining knowledge in the sense of empirical-analytical science: developing and making verifiable statements of greater generalizability and accuracy (higher empirical content).

Literature:

AZT: Prittwitz, Volker von: General Civility Theory, Berlin: Civility gUG, August 2025,

Harrington, Joel F. 2018: Meister Eckhart. The Monk Who Challenged the Church and Found His Own Way to God, Siedler, Munich

Marx, Karl 1845: Theses on Feuerbach (from Marx's notebook)

Popper, Karl R. 1969: The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Tübingen: JCB Mohr (Paul Siebeck), first edition 1934