Difference between revisions of "Conceptualizing Method Hierarchies"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Subject=Method Hierarchy | |Subject=Method Hierarchy | ||
|Subfield=Ontology | |Subfield=Ontology | ||
− | |Question=Should we conceive of a method hierarchy as being composed of individual employed methods/requirements, or should we think of it as constituting one composite method with a system of ''if''-s and ''else''-s, ''and''-s and ''or''-s | + | |Question=Should we conceive of a [[Method Hierarchy|method hierarchy]] as being composed of individual employed methods/requirements, or should we think of it as constituting one composite method with a system of ''if''-s and ''else''-s, ''and''-s and ''or''-s |
|Topic Type=Descriptive | |Topic Type=Descriptive | ||
|Authors List=Mathew Mercuri, Hakob Barseghyan, | |Authors List=Mathew Mercuri, Hakob Barseghyan, |
Latest revision as of 20:04, 5 February 2023
Should we conceive of a method hierarchy as being composed of individual employed methods/requirements, or should we think of it as constituting one composite method with a system of if-s and else-s, and-s and or-s
In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by Hakob Barseghyan and Mathew Mercuri in 2019.
Contents
Scientonomic History
Acceptance Record
Our records state that this question has never been accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by any community.
All Theories
According to our records, no theory has attempted to answer this question.
If an answer to this question is missing, please click here to add it.
Accepted Theories
According to our records, no theory on this topic has ever been accepted.
Suggested Modifications
According to our records, there have been no suggested modifications on this topic.
Current View
There is currently no accepted answer to this question.