What question did this study set out to answer?

This analysis aims to evaluate David Merritt’s scientific methodology in relation to the Theory of Objectivity.

June 21, 2026Open Access

FALSIFIABILITY, CORROBORATION, AND MODAL DISCIPLINE: a critical–propositional analysis of David Merritt's text in confrontation with the Theory of Objectivity

Key Points

This analysis aims to evaluate David Merritt’s scientific methodology in relation to the Theory of Objectivity.
Critical-propositional analysis of Merritt’s 2022 text on scientific methodology.
Dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity, focusing on its modal axioms and cosmological implications.
Examination of methodologies including Popperian and Lakatosian frameworks.
Merritt's framework does not directly support the Theory of Objectivity.
Proposes that TO should formulate testable outcomes rather than accommodating existing data.
Suggests a modal-operational reading as a research programme with necessary modal core and open cosmophysical derivations.

Abstract

This article presents a critical–propositional analysis of David Merritt’s The Scientific Method from a Philosophical Perspective (2022), published on Zenodo under DOI https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6336021, in dialogue with the Theory of Objectivity (TO). The study examines Merritt’s Popperian and Lakatosian approach to scientific methodology, emphasizing falsifiability, corroboration, independent prediction, auxiliary hypotheses, hard cores, progressive and degenerating research programmes, and the epistemological status of cosmological entities such as dark matter and dark energy. The analysis confronts Merritt’s methodological framework with the modal axioms of the Theory of Objectivity, understood as necessary conditions for any logical and coherent universe, while distinguishing between the modal level of TO’s axioms and the physical-operational level of its cosmological derivations. Special attention is given to the logical Nothing, boundary, phenomenic elements, Inducer Effects, the cosmogonic theorem, the cosmological Eras of TO, and the transcendent element understood as the knowledge or information produced in atomic relations and equivalent to atomic radiations. The article argues that Merritt’s work does not directly corroborate the Theory of Objectivity, but provides a rigorous methodological criterion for strengthening its scientific presentation: TO must not merely accommodate data after the fact, but formulate restrictive, independent, and potentially refutable consequences. In this sense, the paper proposes a modal-operational reading of TO as a research programme whose modal core may be defended as necessary, while its cosmophysical derivations must remain open to empirical testing, refinement, and criticism. This analytical text received analytical support from ChatGPT. Keywords: Theory of Objectivity; Vidamor Cabannas; Denivaldo Silva; David Merritt; falsifiability; corroboration; Karl Popper; Imre Lakatos; scientific methodology; philosophy of science; cosmology; MOND; ΛCDM; dark matter; dark energy; modal axioms; logical Nothing; boundary; phenomenic elements; Inducer Effects; cosmogonic theorem; cosmological Eras; atomic radiation; information; testability; modal discipline; operational bridges.

FALSIFIABILITY, CORROBORATION, AND MODAL DISCIPLINE: a critical–propositional analysis of David Merritt's text in confrontation with the Theory of Objectivity

Key Points

Abstract

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider