Identify the correct statement(s): (a) : A fact is an observation that has…
2024
Identify the correct statement(s):
(a) : A fact is an observation that has repeatedly been found to be true over the time.
(b) : A law is a theory that has repeatedly been found to be true over the time.
Answer: A. Only (a) — Concept: In the nature of science, a fact is a directly repeatable observation confirmed true over time; a theory is a well-substantiated explanation of why…
- A.
Only (a)
- B.
(a) and (b)
- C.
Only (b)
- D.
Neither (a) nor (b)
Attempted by 2 students.
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: A
Concept: In the nature of science, a fact is a directly repeatable observation confirmed true over time; a theory is a well-substantiated explanation of why or how a phenomenon occurs; and a law is a concise statement of a consistently observed pattern or relationship. Laws and theories are different KINDS of knowledge (description versus explanation) that exist side by side — one does not turn into the other merely because it has been repeatedly confirmed.
Fact — an observation repeatedly verified to be true.
Law — a descriptive statement of a pattern or relationship seen consistently in nature.
Theory — an explanatory framework, built from tested hypotheses, that accounts for why the pattern exists.
Application: Statement (a) matches the standard definition of a fact exactly, so it holds. Statement (b) claims a law is simply a theory that has been repeatedly confirmed — this treats repetition as promoting a theory into a law, which is not how the two categories relate; a law and a theory remain distinct kinds of statements regardless of how many times either is confirmed. So (b) does not hold.
Contrast with the other options:
“(a) and (b)” — extends the valid fact-definition to also accept the flawed law/theory claim; the second half of this pairing does not hold.
“only (b)” — keeps only the flawed law/theory claim and drops the valid fact-definition, so it retains the wrong part and discards the right one.
“neither” — goes too far by discarding the valid fact-definition along with the flawed law/theory claim.
Cross-check: Well-known scientific laws (e.g. the laws of motion, the laws of thermodynamics) continue to exist alongside separate explanatory theories that account for the same domain; a more detailed theory never "promotes" an existing law into itself, and a heavily confirmed theory is never re-labelled a law — confirming that laws and theories stay in their own categories.
Answer: Only statement (a) is correct.