Abstract
The aim of this article is to demonstrate that comparative theory testing is necessary if political scientists wish to make positive statements regarding the confirmation of their theories. Using the tools of formal logic, the author first establishes that theory confirmation is not possible when a theory is tested in isolation, regardless of the statistical approach—falsificationism, confirmationism, or Bayesian confirmationism—employed by the researcher. The author then establishes a necessary and sufficient condition for positive theory confirmation and shows that this condition is met only when two rival theories are tested against one another. Finally, the author discusses two methods of comparative theory testing demonstrating that being comparative, besides being necessary, is also straightforward and practical.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
