Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, editor, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, Widget editors
11,042
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The Law of Norm Employment (Rawleigh-2022) (view source)
Revision as of 16:15, 30 October 2022
, 16:15, 30 October 2022Created page with "{{Theory |Title=The Law of Norm Employment |Theory Type=Descriptive |Alternate Titles= |Formulation Text=A norm becomes employed only if it is derivable from a non-empty subse..."
{{Theory
|Title=The Law of Norm Employment
|Theory Type=Descriptive
|Alternate Titles=
|Formulation Text=A norm becomes employed only if it is derivable from a non-empty subset of other elements of the mosaic.
|Formulation File=The Law of Norm Employment (Rawleigh-2022).png
|Topic=Mechanism of Norm Employment
|Authors List=William Rawleigh
|Formulated Year=2022
|Description=[[The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)|Sebastien's law of method employment]] faces several problems. Foremost among these is that it is based on an outdated ontology that assumes that methods of theory evaluation are a fundamental epistemic element. After the acceptance of [[Modification:Sciento-2018-0006|Barseghyan’s proposal]] that methods be subsumed under the category of normative theories, the third law no longer exhaustively covers all situations cases of employment. In its present form it is limited to methods, though there is no reason to think that the mechanism by which a method is employed is any different than the mechanism by which any other norm is employed.
In addition, Sebastien's formulation of the third law uses the term ''deducible'', which currently lacks a scientonomic definition. We do not currently know what it means for something to be deducible, what the criteria of deducibility would be, or whether the conditions of deducibility would be part of the first-order theories of the mosaic or part of the second-order theories that range over the mosaic.
The third issue with Sebastien's formulation is that, with the acceptance of questions into the epistemic elements of the ontology of scientific change, the elements of the mosaic are now more expansive than just theories and subtypes of theories. This means that there is a plausible situation in which norms could potentially be derived – at least in part – from questions, which means that a formulation of the third law that excludes questions would fail to comprehensively describe all cases of norm employment.
The new law of norm employment aims to remedy all three of these issues:
* the formulation of the covers all norms rather than only methods;
* it replaces a ''deducible'' with ''derivable'', which in the context of mathematical model theory simply means to ''be semantically entailed'', and thus can potentially include non-deductive inferences (e.g. inductive, abductive);
* it replaces a specific enumeration of epistemic elements with a general "elements of the mosaic".
This definition also offers the slight clarification that derivability strictly deals with derivation from a ''finite'' number of other elements.
|Resource=Rawleigh (2022)
|Prehistory=
|History=
|Page Status=Needs Editing
|Editor Notes=
}}
|Title=The Law of Norm Employment
|Theory Type=Descriptive
|Alternate Titles=
|Formulation Text=A norm becomes employed only if it is derivable from a non-empty subset of other elements of the mosaic.
|Formulation File=The Law of Norm Employment (Rawleigh-2022).png
|Topic=Mechanism of Norm Employment
|Authors List=William Rawleigh
|Formulated Year=2022
|Description=[[The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)|Sebastien's law of method employment]] faces several problems. Foremost among these is that it is based on an outdated ontology that assumes that methods of theory evaluation are a fundamental epistemic element. After the acceptance of [[Modification:Sciento-2018-0006|Barseghyan’s proposal]] that methods be subsumed under the category of normative theories, the third law no longer exhaustively covers all situations cases of employment. In its present form it is limited to methods, though there is no reason to think that the mechanism by which a method is employed is any different than the mechanism by which any other norm is employed.
In addition, Sebastien's formulation of the third law uses the term ''deducible'', which currently lacks a scientonomic definition. We do not currently know what it means for something to be deducible, what the criteria of deducibility would be, or whether the conditions of deducibility would be part of the first-order theories of the mosaic or part of the second-order theories that range over the mosaic.
The third issue with Sebastien's formulation is that, with the acceptance of questions into the epistemic elements of the ontology of scientific change, the elements of the mosaic are now more expansive than just theories and subtypes of theories. This means that there is a plausible situation in which norms could potentially be derived – at least in part – from questions, which means that a formulation of the third law that excludes questions would fail to comprehensively describe all cases of norm employment.
The new law of norm employment aims to remedy all three of these issues:
* the formulation of the covers all norms rather than only methods;
* it replaces a ''deducible'' with ''derivable'', which in the context of mathematical model theory simply means to ''be semantically entailed'', and thus can potentially include non-deductive inferences (e.g. inductive, abductive);
* it replaces a specific enumeration of epistemic elements with a general "elements of the mosaic".
This definition also offers the slight clarification that derivability strictly deals with derivation from a ''finite'' number of other elements.
|Resource=Rawleigh (2022)
|Prehistory=
|History=
|Page Status=Needs Editing
|Editor Notes=
}}
