Britannica Sources used in this answer

What does it mean for a scientific theory to be empirically adequate?

Created from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.

Marble bust of Aristotle with a beard and draped robe, showing detailed facial features and wavy hair, set against a dark background. — Philosophy of science Aristotle, marble portrait bust, Roman copy (2nd century bce) of a Greek original (c. 325 bce); in the Museo Nazionale Romano, Rome.

In the philosophy of science, a scientific theory is considered empirically adequate if it successfully captures or predicts the observable phenomena of the world.1

This concept is central to the doctrine of constructive empiricism, developed by the philosopher Bas van Fraassen. According to this view, the primary aim of science is not necessarily to produce theories that are literally true in their descriptions of unobservable entities or underlying realities, but rather to construct theories that are empirically adequate.1

A theory meets this standard if everything it says about observable matters—the "phenomena"—is true. In practice, this means the theory must be consistent with, and facilitate the correct prediction of, observable facts recorded through observation or experimentation. While scientific realists argue that the success of such theories is best explained by their truth, proponents of empirical adequacy maintain that a theory's inferential reliability regarding observable events is the essential criterion for scientific acceptance.1