ABSTRACT
Analytic theories, to say the least, are contentious. Their critics say they are untestable as they are based mainly on clinical observations which are made to fit retrospectively to the beliefs of the particular researcher. They say these observations are subjective and interpretations made by the observer are likely to be seen as a corroboration of the theories they may espouse. Popper (1963: 38) considers analytic theories in this light and says that ‘they were simply non-testable, irrefutable’. He admits that it does not mean that these observations are necessarily incorrect or that they are not of importance. But he insists ‘that the criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability, or refutability, or testability’.
