Entity Realism The truth about scientific unobservables has been discussed from two distinct sides, realists and anti-realists. I will argue that entity realism is the best way to prove that entities exist. The scientific antirealist believes that there is a difference between unobservable and observable entities. They believe that because there is no concrete evidence of unobservable entities and events, the theories should not be considered true. This does not mean that antirealists do not consider all scientific theories to be false, but that they should only be considered empirically adequate. A theory is deemed to be empirically adequate when observable entities and events are found to be true. The scientific realist believes that there is no difference between unobservable and observable; therefore no line should be drawn between the two. Many people who are not very familiar with science usually take the naive realist position. This is the position where they do not attempt to distinguish the observable from the unobservable. The naïve realist also does not attempt to distinguish observational terms from theoretical terms. Observational terms are terms that explain observable entities and events that occur in scientific experimentation. Some examples of observation terms might be human body parts and a moving car. Theoretical terms are terms that cannot be directly visualized with the naked eye. Some examples of theoretical terms are force and velocity. Realists believe that theoretical terms are proven true through observational terms. The naive realist is able to justify his position thanks to the Success Argument. People are pushed towards realism because of the success of science....... middle of paper ...... or a theory to be true there cannot be even the slightest doubt, in the smallest piece of information that It's part of the theory. The problem with theories is that they try to state too much. There is too much room for error in theories for them to be considered true. I agree with Ian Hacking who is an entity realist. Entity realists believe in things, but not in theories. The entity realist holds that we must believe in the existence of an entity "E" referred to as "E" just in case our understanding of "E" allows us to successfully construct tools that manipulate and they use the world in a variety of different ways. contexts and structures. Entity realists do not believe that entities are true because there is no clear definition of true. Antirealists have no argument against entity realists, because entity realism attempts to overthrow theories.