Should Scientific Theory Be True

Are there good reasons to think scientific theories should be true, rather than “merely” empirically adequate? Yes? Scientific theories provide a satisfying understanding of the world and its objects. We can trust science. But not blindly.

Constructive empiricists like Baas Van Fraassen argue the belief that scientifc theories is not necessary for them to be good. That is an objection to the epistemological aspect of science. The only requirement is to have scientific theories to be empirically adequate. It means that whatever the theory says about obsverable things in the world past, present, future is true.
Since science is a system where theories build on basic principles, it is normal that they are coherent with basic theories. And scientific
One objection to these arguments might be accuracy of medecine to effectively heal people. This could be an example of the success of scientific theories in explaining and controlling the world. It is true that medecine is very successful at healing people. But its theories are not necessarly true. I formulated the objection as the accuracy of medecine at healing people not its absolute unrefuted success at healing. For example, when trying to heal and eradicate cancer, medical scientists have required chemotherapy. Sadly, the theory behinf it seem reasonable but in real life, it is not as succefull as promised. And chemotherapy breeds its own problems in the body; making people sicker without the assurance of the elimination of cancer cells. That is way although of people are reaching to alternative
Every explanation of the world and its object is limited to the extent of our understanding. It is true that even in our experiences, we can only rely on our senses. Tools build from those scientific theories are an aid to assit our senses. So the tools used by scientists are made to magnify what our senses can perceive. For example, 3D imagery used in surgeries are helpful to the surgeon by providing him a precise view on where to operate. Although it is an outstanding invention, it still relies on the sensory factor of the surgeon namely his eyes. One may opposed that it is because scientifists had an intuition or developped an approximated theory that 3D imagery came to be. Therefore, the approximety true theory birthed the tool. But it is not satisfactory. The theory behind 3D imagery was developped because it relied on the fact that most surgein have eyes to see. Most surgeon have performing sensory organs to enable them to see, feel, touch, hear and taste. 3D imagery would of no use, even as a theory have no surgeon had those