The False Hypothesis of the Pack
Hey! “Pack theory” is not a theory at all!
Theories vs Hypotheses
One of the biggest misunderstandings between science folk and lay folk is the definition of the word, “theory,” and here we are adding to that misunderstanding.
In science, the term “theory” has a specific meaning. It is much stronger than how we use the word in casual conversation.
From the National Academy of Sciences:
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.
Heliocentricity is a theory although there is virtually no question that the earth revolves around the sun. Gravity is also a theory. So is learning theory (take that, you quadrants bashers!).
Actually, the scientific meaning of a “hypothesis” is closer to what people mean when they say in everyday settings that they have a theory, although it too has some specific criteria for usage.
Also from the National Academy of Sciences:
A hypothesis is a tentative statement about the natural world leading to deductions that can be tested. If the deductions are verified, it becomes more probable that the hypothesis is correct. If the deductions are incorrect, the original hypothesis can be abandoned or modified. Hypotheses can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations.
Both theories and hypotheses can be disproven, but not proven.
So why are we still using the term “pack theory”? On the one hand a lot of us are trying to teach people the scientific definition of the word, “theory.” On the other we are referring to “pack theory,” which was never was a theory to begin with.
It was an initial idea and statement about the natural world, and maybe qualified as a hypothesis.
This post is not about the incorrectness of the pack hypothesis. If you are interested, here are two articles I wrote about that. There are some original sources at the bottom of the post as well.
This post is just a small rant about nomenclature and its effects on thinking.
By the way, no disrespect meant to L. David Mech, who is a scientific hero as far as I’m concerned. His book came out of those early observations of captive wolves, and he has corrected the misinformation and is actively rectifying the incorrect application of those early ideas to wild wolves. Here are an article and a video he made.
Thanks for reading! So how are you going to refer to “pack stuff” now?
- How Skilled are you at Ignoring (Extinction, Part 2)?
- Shut Down Dogs Part 2
- Threshold: It May Not Be What You Think
- OMG Could She Really be Talking about the Continuum AGAIN?