Evaluation of Scientific Theories: A Structural–Bayesian Approach

This book challenges one of the most persistent illusions of modern thought: the belief that evidence alone decides which theories are true. Across science, philosophy, and public debate, theories are often judged by popularity, elegance, authority, or the sheer volume of supporting data. Yet disagreement persists even where facts are shared. The reason, Boris Kriger argues, lies deeper than evidence itself.

Every theory rests on an underlying structure that determines what counts as an explanation, what is allowed, and what is silently ruled out. Evidence does not speak on its own; it only becomes meaningful within such a structure. This book introduces a structural–Bayesian framework that reveals how belief is constrained before it is ever updated, and why serious theories are defined not by what they explain, but by what they forbid.

Written in clear, non-technical language, this work shows why flexibility often signals weakness, why unfalsifiable theories decay from within, and why confident narratives so easily masquerade as truth. Through examples drawn from physics, biology, cosmology, philosophy of mind, and artificial intelligence, Kriger offers a disciplined way to compare theories without appeal to authority, fashion, or rhetorical force.

This is not a method for producing certainty. It is a guide for resisting illusion. By making structure visible, it restores intellectual responsibility to judgment itself, replacing loud conviction with quiet rigor, and persuasion with clarity.

Keywords
theory evaluation, epistemology, scientific methodology, Bayesian reasoning, structural constraints, philosophy of science, critical thinking