The purpose of this study is to examine, in what extent the mainstream approaches of scientific
theories can be applied on the field of the value-research. Therefore, I will examine these models
through the lense of scientific philosophical approaches of 20th century. Of the three most
significant philosophical theory (Popper’s falsification theory, Kuhn’s paradigm theory, and Imre
Lakatos’s theory of scientific research programs), I apply Lakatos’s theory, since it fits the best
to explain, how parallel research streams emerged on the field of value research. In this study I
strive for conciliate Lakatos’s program and the three significant value models. In the scientific
research program theory Lakatos found that many research programs coexist simultaneously.
Each has a hard core or negative heuristic (as Lakatos calls it) of theories immune to any revision
surrounded by a protective belt or positive heuristic of malleable theories. Every research
program vies against others to be most progressive. In my opinion the core of the program is
the value definition itself, which is used by the different researchers in the field of value studies.
This value definition barely changed during the past few decades. On the other hand, there are
numerous value models aimed to assess people’s value system. These models can be considered
as the protective belt revolving around the hardcore definition. The aim of this paper is not to
emphasize Lakatos’ theory from the philosophical approaches of science, but to examine value
research through a philosophical eye. This approach also can ease the communication between
the value research by exploring the common core of them.