Difference between revisions of "Mechanism of Question Acceptance"
(Created page with "{{Topic |Question=How do ''questions'' become ''accepted'' as legitimate topics of inquiry? What is the ''mechanism'' of question acceptance? |Topic Type=Descriptive |Descript...") |
|||
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Topic | {{Topic | ||
+ | |Subject=Question Acceptance | ||
|Question=How do ''questions'' become ''accepted'' as legitimate topics of inquiry? What is the ''mechanism'' of question acceptance? | |Question=How do ''questions'' become ''accepted'' as legitimate topics of inquiry? What is the ''mechanism'' of question acceptance? | ||
|Topic Type=Descriptive | |Topic Type=Descriptive | ||
− | |Description= | + | |Description=Various theorists have recognized that the kinds of questions that can be asked by scientists changes over time. Kuhn, van Fraassen, and Lauden have all noted this fact to varying degrees without proposing a concrete mechanism by which questions come to be accepted as legitimate at any given time. Kuhn, for example, recognized that the kinds of questions that can be asked by scientists changes with each paradigm shift, but declined to propose a specific mechanism for this phenomena (i.e. what makes a question acceptable in one paradigm but not in another). |
+ | |||
+ | The ontology of epistemic elements of scientific change put forward by [[William Rawleigh]] includes [[Question|questions]] as one of the [[Question Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Rawleigh-2018)|subtypes of epistemic elements]], alongside [[Theory|theories]] and [[Method|methods]]. This, along with the fact that Rawleigh proposes ''acceptance'' and ''unacceptance'' as the possible stances of [[Epistemic Community|epistemic communities]] suggests that there ought to be mechanism by which questions are introduced into a mosaic as legitimate topics of inquiry. | ||
+ | |||
+ | There already exists an accepted [[The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)|mechanism for theories]] and an accepted [[The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)|mechanism for methods]] to explain how those elements become part of a mosaic. Given that a mechanism for theories and methods exists, it is very likely that a mechanism for questions also exists. | ||
|Parent Topic=Mechanism of Scientific Change | |Parent Topic=Mechanism of Scientific Change | ||
|Authors List=William Rawleigh, | |Authors List=William Rawleigh, | ||
|Formulated Year=2018 | |Formulated Year=2018 | ||
|Page Status=Stub | |Page Status=Stub | ||
+ | }} | ||
+ | {{Acceptance Record | ||
+ | |Community=Community:Scientonomy | ||
+ | |Accepted From Era=CE | ||
+ | |Accepted From Year=2018 | ||
+ | |Accepted From Month=November | ||
+ | |Accepted From Day=1 | ||
+ | |Accepted From Approximate=No | ||
+ | |Acceptance Indicators=The question became accepted accepted as a legitimate topic of scientonomic inquiry as a result of the acceptance of the respective [[Modification:Sciento-2018-0004|suggested modification]]. | ||
+ | |Still Accepted=Yes | ||
+ | |Accepted Until Approximate=No | ||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 19:38, 10 February 2023
How do questions become accepted as legitimate topics of inquiry? What is the mechanism of question acceptance?
Various theorists have recognized that the kinds of questions that can be asked by scientists changes over time. Kuhn, van Fraassen, and Lauden have all noted this fact to varying degrees without proposing a concrete mechanism by which questions come to be accepted as legitimate at any given time. Kuhn, for example, recognized that the kinds of questions that can be asked by scientists changes with each paradigm shift, but declined to propose a specific mechanism for this phenomena (i.e. what makes a question acceptable in one paradigm but not in another).
The ontology of epistemic elements of scientific change put forward by William Rawleigh includes questions as one of the subtypes of epistemic elements, alongside theories and methods. This, along with the fact that Rawleigh proposes acceptance and unacceptance as the possible stances of epistemic communities suggests that there ought to be mechanism by which questions are introduced into a mosaic as legitimate topics of inquiry.
There already exists an accepted mechanism for theories and an accepted mechanism for methods to explain how those elements become part of a mosaic. Given that a mechanism for theories and methods exists, it is very likely that a mechanism for questions also exists.
In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by William Rawleigh in 2018. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community.
Contents
Scientonomic History
Acceptance Record
Community | Accepted From | Acceptance Indicators | Still Accepted | Accepted Until | Rejection Indicators |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scientonomy | 1 November 2018 | The question became accepted accepted as a legitimate topic of scientonomic inquiry as a result of the acceptance of the respective suggested modification. | Yes |
All Theories
Theory | Formulation | Formulated In |
---|---|---|
The Law of Question Acceptance (Barseghyan-Levesley-2021) | A question becomes accepted only if all of its epistemic presuppositions are accepted and it is accepted that the question is answerable. | 2021 |
If an answer to this question is missing, please click here to add it.
Accepted Theories
Suggested Modifications
Modification | Community | Date Suggested | Summary | Verdict | Verdict Rationale | Date Assessed |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sciento-2021-0002 | Scientonomy | 1 August 2021 | Accept the law of question acceptance as a new scientonomic axiom, the question rejection theorem, and a number of questions for future research. | Open |
Current View
There is currently no accepted answer to this question.
Related Topics
This question is a subquestion of Mechanism of Scientific Change.
It has the following sub-topic(s):