This essay examines the argument given by Richard Dawid (2013, 2019) for the viability of non-empirical assessment of scientific theories. Dawid's argument is supposed to show that trust in a scientific theory can be justified without any direct empirical testing of the theory. This view is fundamentally different from what will be called the classical paradigm of theory assessment. The classical paradigm holds that only empirical testing can justify belief in a theory. It is argued in this essay that Dawid's argument does not provide sufficient reasons for claiming that non-empirical assessment can be seen as a valid form of justification of scientific theories. However, it is further argued that non-empirical assessment still can play an important role when evaluating the status of a theory that cannot yet be tested empirically.