I agree basically with most that has been said about the scientific method by most of the previous messages in this thread. Only would like to make a contribution, based on Karl Popper, that I find particularly simple, focused and relevant.
A scientific theory, T, is established to explain a problem P1.
The evaluation, E, of T is based in a priori examination, and a posteriori evaluation.
The a priori examination comprises its content, its capacity to explain the relevant problem, and its degree of suitability to be subjected to testing (a posteriori).
The a posteriori evaluation is made by submitting the theory to ingenious tests and verifications.
The theories that have a low a priori content need not to be subjected to a posteriori verification, since, by definition lack the suitability for the a posteriori testing.
The most probable outcome will be that the evaluation will raise some new problem P2. This will be the starting point for a new theory T2. The distance between problem P1 and P2 is the contribution of theory T to progress.
™ Version 4.2
