You and Your Personal Theories

4/2/2025

You and Your Personal Theories
You need them and have them, but do you know it?

 

1. Introduction. There are the big theories, like atomic theory, and there are your personal theories. Yes, you have them. Before jumping into “personal” theories, it is best to frame out what a theory actually is, and to note theories are everywhere from science to psychology to art. Theories form the coherent and consistent containers of knowledge by subject. But they have rather strict rules, though not always followed. Often, for any particular subject, multiple theories persist. Economics, psychology, and even parenting have many. Physics and math have fewer. Of course, within many big subjects, theories for multiple subareas exist. Think of the very different theories of constitutional law and corporate law, for example. Problem-solving is typically carried out within a particular theory, though all require critical thinking. Personal theories often ignore these rules and have a personal significance from which personal decisions are made. See Section 3.  While we seem to be talking about and around these two types of theories, we really need to define and describe them first. Then, we’ll be ready to contrast the differences.

2. What is a Theory? A theory is a fundamental component or container of human knowledge, serving as a structured explanation of observed phenomena. Across disciplines such as science, philosophy, and the social sciences, theories provide frameworks for understanding the complexities of the world. They enable the organization of facts, the connections between facts, the formulation of predictions, and the development of new knowledge. A well-constructed theory is more than just speculation; it is a carefully formulated and tested explanation grounded in evidence and logic. While intuition may be a powerful tool for knowledge formation, it is not a source of knowledge, per se.

A theory is defined as an organized system of ideas intended to explain a particular phenomenon or set of phenomena. It is built upon a foundation of empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and systematic observation. Unlike mere conjecture or opinion, a theory is subjected to rigorous scrutiny and continuous refinement. Theories are not static; they evolve as new evidence emerges, adapting to better explain the subject they address.

The characteristics of a theory are perhaps most familiar to most readers. We look at several of them and distinguish them from knowledge, noting these are not strictly followed all the time. For example, most philosophical theories are not testable using data.

·       Explanatory Power – A theory provides a coherent explanation of why certain phenomena occur. For instance, the Theory of Evolution explains the diversity of life through natural selection.

·       Predictability – Theories allow for predictions about future observations or events. Newton’s Theory of Gravitation, for example, enables precise calculations of planetary motion.

·       Testability and Falsifiability – A strong theory must be testable and capable of being proven false under specific conditions. Karl Popper, a philosopher of science, emphasized falsifiability as a key criterion for distinguishing scientific theories from non-scientific ideas. Falsifiability is not a hard and fast condition.

·       Empirical Support – Theories rely on data and experimental results for validation. They must be supported by observations and experiments that consistently confirm their accuracy.

·       Logical Coherence – Theories must be internally consistent, without contradictions, and should align with established knowledge while providing new insights.

·       Subject to Revision – Theories are not absolute truths; they evolve as new data emerges. The transition from Newtonian physics to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity demonstrates how theories can be refined or replaced. As well, modern theories of disease began with germs. Later viruses and recently prions (mad cow disease) were included.

The concept of a theory is applied across multiple disciplines, each with its own methodological approaches and frameworks. There are several notable types.

·       Scientific Theories – These explain natural phenomena based on empirical evidence and experimentation. Examples include the Germ Theory of Disease, which revolutionized medicine, and the Big Bang Theory, which describes the origin of the universe.

·       Mathematical Theories – These are abstract, logical structures built upon axioms and proofs. Number Theory, for instance, explores properties of numbers and their relationships.

·       Social and Political Theories – These interpret human behavior and societal structures. Examples include Marxist Theory, which examines class struggles, and Social Contract Theory, which explores the foundations of government and authority.

·       Philosophical Theories – These provide conceptual frameworks for understanding reality, knowledge, and ethics. Theories such as Dualism and Utilitarianism shape discussions in metaphysics and moral philosophy.

It is important to distinguish theories from hypotheses. A common misconception is that a theory and a hypothesis are the same. However, they serve different roles in the process of knowledge formation. A hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction that serves as the starting point for investigation. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation that integrates multiple proven hypotheses and observations into a coherent framework. For example, in medicine, a researcher might hypothesize that a new drug will lower blood pressure. If repeated experiments confirm this and align with broader biological principles, the findings may contribute to a larger theory of cardiovascular health. Indeed, theories are mobile, some combining new facts into other theories, some theories splitting into new theories.

While theories do not require wisdom as a transcendental component, they often form an important factor in making hypotheses – the right hypotheses. The key to making the correct prediction or guess is to have the knowledge, intuition, and experience to ask precisely the right questions. This is often called wisdom. You can’t take a course on it, It happens, but only for a few.

Theories evolve and are not immutable; they adapt to accommodate new discoveries. Even still, each generation of researchers believe they are working on the best and final versions of the facts. However, hardly any theory has lasted more than a few centuries. Scientific revolutions often involve the replacement or refinement of existing theories. Some examples.

·       The Continental Contraction Theory, which purported in the late 19th and early 20th centuries that the Earth was gradually cooling and contracting since its formation was replaced by Plate Tectonics, by which the Earth's rigid outer layer, composed of the crust and the upper part of the mantle is broken into several major and minor tectonic plates. Alfred Wegener.

·       The Geocentric Theory, which posited that Earth was the center of the universe, was replaced by the Heliocentric Theory proposed by Copernicus, validated by Galileo, and then proved by Newton.

·       The Steady State Theory (Cosmology) proposed that the universe is unchanging and eternal, with new matter continuously being created to maintain a constant density. It was replaced by The Big Bang theory. Georges Lemaître, et al.

·       The Miasma Theory (Medicine) held that diseases were caused by "miasmas," or bad air, emanating from decaying organic matter. It was replaced by Germ Theory of disease, which established that microorganisms are the cause of infectious diseases. Pasteur.

·       The Theory of Spontaneous Generation, which suggested that life could arise from non-living matter, was disproven by Pasteur’s experiments, leading to the establishment of modern microbiology.

Historically, many theories began as a summary of specialized knowledge already understood. Airplanes were flying all over the place before the first course in aeronautical engineering was offered. Insurance companies were struggling with morality tables long before anyone knew what an actuary was. Psychologists have been practicing from time immemorial. One of the earliest applications of probability was gambling, now a key component of quantum mechanics, a theory still not well understood. (I don’t anyway.)

To summarize, a theory is an essential tool for understanding the world, providing structured explanations that help organize knowledge, predict future events, and refine human understanding. Theories are built on evidence, are logically coherent, and are continuously tested against new observations. Across all fields of study, from the natural sciences to philosophy and sociology, theories serve as the backbone of intellectual progress. As knowledge expands, theories evolve, reflecting humanity’s pursuit of truth and understanding. There’s even a theory of theories, delightful for philosophers.

To this author’s mind, the best purpose of theories is to create a framework for solving problems. This in turn improves the theory. However, the great physicist Niels Bohr instructs us that, "When you solve a problem, that confirms the theory, but when you find a paradox, you are making progress." (paraphrased from  L I Ponomarev, The Quantum Dice.)

3. You and Your Theories. Now, let’s take up the human factor. The human mind, a relentless architect, constructs theories as readily as a spider spins webs. We are, each of us, a scientist in our own right, constantly observing, hypothesizing, and testing the world around us. These (personal) theories, often unspoken and even unconscious, shape our perceptions, guide our actions, and define our very understanding of reality. From the grand narratives we build about the universe to the smallest assumptions we make about the person sitting across from us, theories are the invisible scaffolding upon which we navigate our existence. Yet, they are called theories because we do have some, possibly weak, evidence to support them, and this separates them from beliefs. Personal opinions are similar to but more focused and specific than personal theories. For example, if I say my opinion is he lies too much, that isn’t necessarily a consequence of some personal theory.

Our earliest theories are often inherited, absorbed from family, culture, and prevailing societal narratives. We learn, for instance, that fire burns, that kindness is rewarded, and that the sun will rise each morning. These foundational assumptions become the bedrock or anchors of our understanding, providing a sense of stability and predictability in an often chaotic world. Yet, as we mature, our experiences begin to challenge these inherited truths. We encounter individuals who defy stereotypes, events that shatter our expectations, and information that contradicts our established beliefs. This is where the real work of theory-building begins. This is a type of internal evolution from beliefs to constructs supported by evidence, though slight.

The process is rarely linear. We grapple with and even resist cognitive dissonance, that uncomfortable tension between our existing theories and new information. We may cling to our old beliefs, dismissing contradictory evidence as anomalies or exceptions. Or we may engage in a process of revision, creating or modifying our theories to accommodate the new data. This process of adaptation, of constantly refining our understanding, is essential for growth and intellectual honesty.  

Figure 1 Personal Growth 

Our personal theories are rarely abstract constructs; they have direct and profound practical implications in our lives. They shape our decisions, influence our relationships, form a framework for solving personal problems, and determine our sense of self.  A theory that the world is inherently hostile, for example, will lead to a life lived in fear and defensiveness. A theory that people are fundamentally good, on the other hand, will foster trust and openness. Similarly, our theories about ourselves—our perceived strengths, weaknesses, and potential—will significantly impact our choices and achievements. Our childhood and parents have a great effect on our flexibility as adults to adapt and evolve. Some never can.

Our theories form our operational calculus for living. Sure, we accept science and all that, but they don’t manage children, keep our job, or make friends. Yet, many of us do not know precisely what our theories are.

In addition, our theories are also susceptible to bias. We tend to seek out information that confirms our existing beliefs, while ignoring or downplaying contradictory evidence. This confirmation bias can lead to a distorted view of reality, reinforcing our prejudices and limiting our understanding. The source is often rooted in misconceptions, and they are terribly difficult to determine, much less overcome. We are also prone to the availability heuristic, relying on easily accessible information to form our judgments, even if that information is not representative of the broader picture. Paradoxically, if you believe you don’t have confirmation bias, this means you do.

The challenge, then, is to cultivate a critical and self-aware approach to our own theories. We must learn to question our assumptions, to seek out diverse perspectives, and to be open to revising our beliefs in the face of new evidence. We must recognize that our theories are not fixed truths, but rather provisional maps, constantly being updated and refined. It is important to understand that these provisions comprise the highest goals, many of which are never reached. All are difficult, and impossible for some.

Ultimately, understanding our own theories is an act of self-discovery, if we even get to this step. By examining the assumptions that shape our perceptions, we gain a deeper understanding of ourselves and our place in the world. We become more mindful of our biases, more open to new possibilities, and more capable of navigating the complexities of human experience. We recognize that our theories are less intellectual exercises yet form the fabric of our reality. And in that recognition lies the potential for growth, wisdom if possible, and a more authentic understanding of ourselves and the world around us. A short list below is a sample of personal theories most of us hold dear.

·       Theory of family relationships and raising children.

·       Theory of our job, how to behave, grow, factors to avoid.

·       Theory of friendship.

·       Theory of trust or non-trust with people, politics, services.

·       Theory of a proper diet, including limitations, healthy living.

Between the lofty theories of academics and the humbler theories of you and I, there exists an in-between class of theories, on sale in your local bookstore. Called self-help books, they are the visions of popular authors. The most recent I’ve seen is by Mel Robbins, titled “The Let Them Theory”. It was written to help all who feel overwhelmed or frustrated because they give power to others. I guess the word “theory” in the title helps sell books.

4. Conclusions. Our personal theories are not theories in the rigorous sense of science. They are guidelines by which we operate day-to-day.  They contain knowledge built up over years, but tainted by beliefs, bias, and a serious lack of rigor. Yet, they sustain us as we navigate our personal lives. They even support humor to cope with downturns and mild calamities. They dovetail with beliefs and religion, sometimes to the point we don’t quite know when a belief ends, and a theory begins. They regulate behavior; they guide us in family relationships; they give us natural limits based on the single concept, “This has gone too far.” Or “There’s something wrong here.” Personal theories are more than mere social rules. Many animal groups have those. Personal theories encompass personal strategies and tactics. They also reflect societal needs when complexity demands it. Finally, we cannot live without them, imperfect though they are.

5. References with Notes. Below is a list of references that explore the topic "You and Your Theories," encompassing both the positive and negative aspects of how individuals form, hold, and are shaped by their theories. These sources span psychology, philosophy, science, and real-world experiences, offering a mix of academic rigor and accessible insights. They address the empowering potential of theories as well as their flaws, like confirmation bias, cognitive dissonance, and beliefs.

1.               Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011. Relevance: Kahneman dives into how our minds construct theories through fast, intuitive thinking and slower, deliberate reasoning. He covers confirmation bias (the "good" of quick judgments, the "bad" of distorted perceptions) with evidence from behavioral economics. Chapter 10, on the "engine of coherence," is a goldmine for understanding why we stick to flawed ideas.

2.               Festinger, Leon. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press, 1957.  Relevance: The foundational text on cognitive dissonance, showing how people rationalize contradictions between their theories and reality. Festinger’s study of the Seekers (Chapter 1) is a stark example of the "bad"—clinging to failed beliefs—while his broader theory hints at the "good" of adaptability when dissonance is faced head-on.

3.         Popper, Karl. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge, 1959. Relevance: Popper champions falsifiability as the hallmark of a good theory, emphasizing the positive role of testing and refining ideas in science. His critique of untestable theories (e.g., psychoanalysis) highlights the "bad"—how vague or dogmatic frameworks stifle progress. Chapter 4 on testing is key.

4.               Gladwell, Malcolm. Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. Little, Brown and Company, 2005. Relevance: Gladwell explores the upside of snap theories—intuition’s brilliance in experts like art appraisers—while warning of its downsides, like racial profiling. The "good" is rapid insight; the "bad" is unchecked bias. Chapter 1’s art forgery case ties it to personal theorizing.

5.               Wason, Peter C. "On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses in a Conceptual Task." Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 12, no. 3, 1960, pp. 129–140. Relevance: This is the study that birthed "confirmation bias." Wason shows how people seek confirming evidence for their theories (the "bad") rather than disproving them (the "good" scientific ideal). It’s a lab-based look at why your theories can trap you.

6.               Westen, Drew, et al. "Neural Bases of Motivated Reasoning: An fMRI Study of Emotional Constraints on Partisan Political Judgment." Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. 18, no. 11, 2006, pp. 1947–1958. Relevance: This fMRI study reveals how the brain rewards us for sticking to biased political theories, lighting up pleasure centers when we hear what we like. The "bad" is clear—neural wiring favors comfort over truth—but it hints at the "good" of self-awareness if we catch it.

7.               Davis, Daryl. Accidental Courtesy: Daryl Davis, Race & America. Directed by Matthew Ornstein, PBS, 2016. Relevance: This documentary chronicles Davis’s theory that dialogue can dismantle hate, tested by engaging Klansmen. The "good" is his success—dozens left the Klan. The "bad" is the risk of naive optimism, though he mitigates it with persistence. A living case of theory meeting reality.

8.               Bezos, Jeff. "The Kindle Launch Speech." Amazon Press Conference, November 19, 2007. Relevance: Bezos outlines his theory that digital reading could outpace physical books, countering industry bias. The "good" is the Kindle’s triumph; the "bad" was the gamble against entrenched norms.

9.               "Confirmation Bias." Psychology Today. (Accessed March 25, 2025, via psychologytoday.com.) Relevance: A concise overview of how confirmation bias shapes personal theories, with examples like political polarization. The "good" is its role in quick decisions; the "bad" is its distortion of truth.

10.       "The Flat Earth Society." (flatearthsociety.org, active as of 2025.)             Relevance: This site showcases the extreme "bad" of theory, rejecting evidence for a comforting, contrarian belief.

 

 

 

©2025 G. Donald Allen