This section explains how Value Management Theory (VMT) satisfies the requirement of falsifiability. In VMT, falsifiability is addressed in three complementary ways:
- logical–structural falsification (internal consistency of the formal apparatus),
- empirical falsification at the level of theorems (under an explicitly specified value system),
- methodological underdetermination (separating theory refutation from specification refutation).
1. Logical–Structural Falsification
VMT is falsified if one can construct an internal contradiction while correctly adhering to definitions O1-O15. Examples of formal contradictions include:
- the existence of a value system with |A| < 2 or without reciprocal flows, while value interpretation remains meaningful (violates O1.2);
- the emergence of realized value without an act of flow consumption by the receiving actor (violates O7 and A6);
- the existence of value transformation without the emergence of new Vplan/AVplan for other actors after realization (violates O8 and A7).
2. Empirical Falsification at the Level of Theorems
Because VMT is contextual (A1), a correct empirical test requires:
- explicit specification of VS = {A, F, G, R, T}, and
- explicit identification of which observations are treated as indicators of Vreal/AVreal.
Under these conditions, potential falsifiers take the following form:
F1. Falsification of A4/T3 (Structural Asymmetry)
If, in a broad class of non-trivial systems, it is shown that Vplan = Vreal for flows systematically and stably (not as a special case), then A4/T3 are false.
F2. Falsification of T9 (Hidden Flows)
If the observable flow structure is sufficient to predict system sustainability or collapse, and it can be strictly demonstrated that there are neither latent flows nor boundary specification errors, then T9 in its strong form may be weakened. (In practice this is extremely difficult, but logically possible.)
F3. Falsification of T8 (Role-Oriented Sustainability)
If a sustainable system is demonstrated in which a necessary transformation role is fully lost on a system segment, and no alternative role emerges and no compensating restructuring of flows/criteria occurs, then T8 is false.
F4. Falsification of T10 (Two-Sided Dependency)
If a stable class of systems is demonstrated where termination of the required inflow/outflow does not affect flow resistance or participation conditions under a fixed system structure, then T10 is false.
3. Methodological Note on Underdetermination
Any empirical test of VMT relies on auxiliary hypotheses, including:
- selection of system boundaries A, F;
- selection of the temporal horizon T;
- interpretation rules R;
- observability indicators for Vreal/AVreal.
Therefore, falsification in practice typically has one of two forms:
- falsification of the theory itself, or
- falsification of the chosen system specification VS.
VMT requires explicit separation of these levels in scientific interpretation of empirical results.