Difference between revisions of "Test"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | {{#ask:<!-- | |
| − | |||
-->[[SubObjectCategory::Current Answer]]<!-- | -->[[SubObjectCategory::Current Answer]]<!-- | ||
-->[[Topic::Mechanism of Scientific Change]]<!-- | -->[[Topic::Mechanism of Scientific Change]]<!-- | ||
| Line 9: | Line 8: | ||
-->|sort=Answer Type, Sorting Order<!-- | -->|sort=Answer Type, Sorting Order<!-- | ||
-->|order=asc, asc<!-- | -->|order=asc, asc<!-- | ||
| + | -->|format=table<!-- | ||
-->|link=none<!-- | -->|link=none<!-- | ||
-->|limit=10000<!-- | -->|limit=10000<!-- | ||
| − | -->}} | + | -->}} |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Revision as of 21:53, 26 February 2023
| An element of the mosaic remains in the mosaic unless replaced by other elements. |
| If a theory satisfies the acceptance criteria of the method employed at the time, it becomes accepted into the mosaic; if it does not, it remains unaccepted; if assessment is inconclusive, the theory can be accepted or not accepted. |
| A method becomes employed only when it is deducible from some subset of other employed methods and accepted theories of the time. |
| If a pair of elements satisfies the compatibility criteria employed at the time, it becomes compatible within the mosaic; if it does not, it is deemed incompatible; and if assessment is inconclusive, the pair can become compatible, incompatible, or its status may be unknown. |
| A theory becomes rejected only when other theories that are incompatible with the theory become accepted. |
| A method ceases to be employed only when other methods that are incompatible with the method become employed. |
| If an accepted theory is taken as the final truth, it will always remain accepted; no new theory on the subject can ever be accepted. |
| Sociocultural factors can affect the process of theory acceptance insofar as it is permitted by the method employed at the time. |
| When two mutually incompatible theories satisfy the requirements of the current method, the mosaic necessarily splits in two. When a theory assessment outcome is inconclusive, a mosaic split is possible. When a mosaic split is a result of the acceptance of only one theory, it can only be a result of inconclusive theory assessment. |
| Transitions from one state of the mosaic to another are not necessarily deterministic. Scientific change is not a strictly deterministic process. The process of method change is not necessarily deterministic: employed methods are by no means the only possible implementations of abstract requirements. The process of theory change is not necessarily deterministic: there may be cases when both a theory's acceptance and its unacceptance are equally possible. |
| A methodology can shape employed methods, but only if its requirements implement abstract requirements of some other employed method. |
The First Law (Barseghyan-2015), The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017), The Third Law (Sebastien-2016), The Law of Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018), Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Method Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Dogmatism No Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Sociocultural Factors in Theory Acceptance theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Necessary Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Possible Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Split Due to Inconclusiveness theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Underdetermined Method Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Underdetermined Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Scientific Underdeterminism theorem (Barseghyan-2015) and Methodology Can Shape Method theorem (Barseghyan-2015) are currently accepted by Scientonomy community as the best available answers to the question. They can be summarized as follows. An element of the mosaic remains in the mosaic unless replaced by other elements. If a theory satisfies the acceptance criteria of the method employed at the time, it becomes accepted into the mosaic; if it does not, it remains unaccepted; if assessment is inconclusive, the theory can be accepted or not accepted. A method becomes employed only when it is deducible from some subset of other employed methods and accepted theories of the time. If a pair of elements satisfies the compatibility criteria employed at the time, it becomes compatible within the mosaic; if it does not, it is deemed incompatible; and if assessment is inconclusive, the pair can become compatible, incompatible, or its status may be unknown. A theory becomes rejected only when other theories that are incompatible with the theory become accepted. A method ceases to be employed only when other methods that are incompatible with the method become employed. If an accepted theory is taken as the final truth, it will always remain accepted; no new theory on the subject can ever be accepted. Sociocultural factors can affect the process of theory acceptance insofar as it is permitted by the method employed at the time. When two mutually incompatible theories satisfy the requirements of the current method, the mosaic necessarily splits in two. When a theory assessment outcome is inconclusive, a mosaic split is possible. When a mosaic split is a result of the acceptance of only one theory, it can only be a result of inconclusive theory assessment. Transitions from one state of the mosaic to another are not necessarily deterministic. Scientific change is not a strictly deterministic process. The process of method change is not necessarily deterministic: employed methods are by no means the only possible implementations of abstract requirements. The process of theory change is not necessarily deterministic: there may be cases when both a theory's acceptance and its unacceptance are equally possible. A methodology can shape employed methods, but only if its requirements implement abstract requirements of some other employed method.
Size: 15
The First Law (Barseghyan-2015), The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017), The Third Law (Sebastien-2016), The Law of Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018), Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Method Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Dogmatism No Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Sociocultural Factors in Theory Acceptance theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Necessary Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Possible Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Split Due to Inconclusiveness theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Underdetermined Method Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Underdetermined Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Scientific Underdeterminism theorem (Barseghyan-2015) and Methodology Can Shape Method theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
| Topic | Theory | Formulation Text | Answer Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | The First Law (Barseghyan-2015) | An element of the mosaic remains in the mosaic unless replaced by other elements. | Partial |
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017) | If a theory satisfies the acceptance criteria of the method employed at the time, it becomes accepted into the mosaic; if it does not, it remains unaccepted; if assessment is inconclusive, the theory can be accepted or not accepted. | Partial |
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | The Third Law (Sebastien-2016) | A method becomes employed only when it is deducible from some subset of other employed methods and accepted theories of the time. | Partial |
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | The Law of Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018) | If a pair of elements satisfies the compatibility criteria employed at the time, it becomes compatible within the mosaic; if it does not, it is deemed incompatible; and if assessment is inconclusive, the pair can become compatible, incompatible, or its status may be unknown. | Partial |
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015) | A theory becomes rejected only when other theories that are incompatible with the theory become accepted. | Partial |
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | Method Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015) | A method ceases to be employed only when other methods that are incompatible with the method become employed. | Partial |
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | Dogmatism No Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015) | If an accepted theory is taken as the final truth, it will always remain accepted; no new theory on the subject can ever be accepted. | Partial |
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | Sociocultural Factors in Theory Acceptance theorem (Barseghyan-2015) | Sociocultural factors can affect the process of theory acceptance insofar as it is permitted by the method employed at the time. | Partial |
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | Necessary Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Possible Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Split Due to Inconclusiveness theorem (Barseghyan-2015) | When two mutually incompatible theories satisfy the requirements of the current method, the mosaic necessarily splits in two. When a theory assessment outcome is inconclusive, a mosaic split is possible. When a mosaic split is a result of the acceptance of only one theory, it can only be a result of inconclusive theory assessment. | Partial |
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | Underdetermined Method Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Underdetermined Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Scientific Underdeterminism theorem (Barseghyan-2015) | Transitions from one state of the mosaic to another are not necessarily deterministic. Scientific change is not a strictly deterministic process. The process of method change is not necessarily deterministic: employed methods are by no means the only possible implementations of abstract requirements. The process of theory change is not necessarily deterministic: there may be cases when both a theory's acceptance and its unacceptance are equally possible. | Partial |
| Mechanism of Scientific Change | Methodology Can Shape Method theorem (Barseghyan-2015) | A methodology can shape employed methods, but only if its requirements implement abstract requirements of some other employed method. | Partial |
Current answers to Epistemic Stances Towards Theories are: The stances of theory acceptance, theory pursuit and theory use can be taken towards a theory.
Current answers to Epistemic Stances Towards Questions are: The stance of question acceptance can be taken towards a question.
Current answers to Mechanism of Mosaic Split are: When two mutually incompatible theories satisfy the requirements of the current method, the mosaic necessarily splits in two. When a theory assessment outcome is inconclusive, a mosaic split is possible. When a mosaic split is a result of the acceptance of only one theory, it can only be a result of inconclusive theory assessment.
Template:SetTopicHasAcceptedAnswer Temp
In Scientonomy, the accepted answers to the question are The First Law (Barseghyan-2015), The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017), The Third Law (Sebastien-2016), The Law of Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018), Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Method Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Dogmatism No Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Sociocultural Factors in Theory Acceptance theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Necessary Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Possible Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Split Due to Inconclusiveness theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Underdetermined Method Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Underdetermined Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015), Scientific Underdeterminism theorem (Barseghyan-2015) and Methodology Can Shape Method theorem (Barseghyan-2015).
---
Heritable Questions of Descriptive Theory:
Mechanism of Scientific Inertia for Descriptive Theories
The question has no accepted answer.
Necessary Descriptive Theories
The question has no accepted answer.
Subsumes items of Epistemic Stance: Compatibility, Epistemic Stance, Norm Employment, Question Acceptance, Theory Acceptance, Theory Pursuit, Theory Use
Questions of subsumes items of Epistemic Stance: Mechanism of Norm Employment, Mechanism of Question Acceptance, Mechanism of Theory Acceptance
Children Array: Question, Theory, Explicit and Implicit
---
Question, Theory, Explicit, Implicit
Question, Theory, Explicit and Implicit
Subsumes Items of Epistemic Element: Definition, Descriptive Theory, Epistemic Element, Explicit, Implicit, Method, Normative Theory, Question, Theory
Descendant Items of Epistemic Element: Definition, Descriptive Theory, Explicit, Implicit, Method, Normative Theory, Question, Theory
Ancestor Items of Method: Epistemic Element, Normative Theory, Theory
Subsumed Items of Method: Epistemic Element, Method, Normative Theory, Theory
Answers to the subquestions of Epistemic Element:
Epistemic Stances
This a test string that contains all the forms, including lowercase <subject>, <subjects>, and <a subject>, as well as capitalized <Subject>, <Subjects>, and <a Subject>. It does that several times for the sake of testing. Here they are again: <subject>, <subjects>, and <a subject>, as well as capitalized <Subject>, <Subjects>, and <a Subject>.
This a test string that contains all the forms, including lowercase epistemic element, theory, theory acceptance, theory use and some random text, epistemic elements, theories, instances of theory acceptance, instances of theory use and some random texts, and an epistemic element, a theory, theory acceptance, theory use and a some random text, as well as capitalized Epistemic Element, Theory, Theory Acceptance, Theory Use and Some random text, Epistemic Elements, Theories, Instances of Theory Acceptance, Instances of Theory Use and Some random texts, and an Epistemic Element, a Theory, Theory Acceptance, Theory Use and a Some random text. It does that several times for the sake of testing. Here they are again: epistemic element, theory, theory acceptance, theory use and some random text, epistemic elements, theories, instances of theory acceptance, instances of theory use and some random texts, and an epistemic element, a theory, theory acceptance, theory use and a some random text, as well as capitalized Epistemic Element, Theory, Theory Acceptance, Theory Use and Some random text, Epistemic Elements, Theories, Instances of Theory Acceptance, Instances of Theory Use and Some random texts, and an Epistemic Element, a Theory, Theory Acceptance, Theory Use and a Some random text.
Epistemic Stances Towards Epistemic Elements
What epistemic elements can the stance of theory acceptance be taken towards?
Epistemic Stances
varTemp: Some text and some other text.
AnASLow: a method
AnASLow: a some word
AnASLow: an empty word
AnASCap: a Method
AnASCap: a Some word
AnASCap: an Empty word
SCap: Method
SLow: method
PCap: Epsitemic Stances, Methods, Theories, Instances of Theory Acceptance, Some other terms and Random texts
PLow: epistemic elements, methods, theories, instances of theory acceptance, some other terms and random texts
The following subtypes of Epistemic Element are currently accepted in Scientonomy:
- The main subtypes of Epistemic Element are Question and Theory.
- On the basis of explicitness, the subtypes of Epistemic Element are Explicit and Implicit.
The following subtypes of Epistemic Element are currently accepted in Scientonomy. The main subtypes of Epistemic Element are Question and Theory. On the basis of explicitness, the subtypes of Epistemic Element are Explicit and Implicit.
Hello World!
| Formulated Year | Authors List | Child | Disjoint Group | Disjoint Group Order | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Barseghyan-2015) | 2015 | Hakob Barseghyan | Method | Main | 1 |
| Question Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Rawleigh-2018) | 2018 | William Rawleigh | Question | Main | 1 |
| Theory Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Barseghyan-2015) | 2015 | Hakob Barseghyan | Theory | Main | 1 |
| Explicit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Mirkin-2018) | 2018 | Maxim Mirkin | Explicit | explicitness | 2 |
| Implicit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Mirkin-2018) | 2018 | Maxim Mirkin | Implicit | explicitness | 2 |
Main,explicitness
Question Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Rawleigh-2018), Theory Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Barseghyan-2015), Explicit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Mirkin-2018) and Implicit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Mirkin-2018)
Compatibility Criteria (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
There are several options here: One, Two, Three and Four.
There is only one option: One There are no options.
Like demarcation and acceptance criteria, compatibility criteria can be part of an epistemic agent's employed method. An epistemic agent employs these criteria to determine whether two elements (e.g. methods, theories, questions) are mutually compatible or incompatible, i.e. whether they can be simultaneously part of the agent's mosaic. In principle, these criteria can be employed to determine the compatibility of elements present in the mosaic, as well as those outside of it (e.g. scientists often think about whether a proposed theory is compatible with the theories actually accepted at the time). Fraser and Sarwar point out that Barseghyan's original definition of the term "excludes a simple point that is assumed elsewhere in scientonomy: elements other than theories (i.e. methods and questions) may be compatible or incompatible with other elements (which, again, need not be theories)".p. 72 To fix this omission, Fraser and Sarwar "suggest that the word ‘theories’ be changed to ‘elements’ to account for the fact that the compatibility criteria apply to theories, methods, and questions alike".p. 72
Different communities can have different compatibility criteria. While some communities may opt to employ the logical law of noncontradiction as their criterion of compatibility, other communities may be more tolerant towards logical inconsistencies. According to Barseghyan, the fact that these days scientists "often simultaneously accept theories which strictly speaking logically contradict each other is a good indication that the actual criteria of compatibility employed by the scientific community might be quite different from the classical logical law of noncontradiction".p. 11 For example, this is apparent in the case of general relativity vs. quantum physics where both theories are accepted as the best available descriptions of their respective domains (i.e. they are considered compatible), but are known to be in conflict when applied simultaneously to such objects as black holes.
Hello world
This is a definition of Method that states "A set of criteria for theory evaluation."
This is an answer to the question Mechanism of Theory Acceptance that states "In order to become accepted into the mosaic, a theory is assessed by the method actually employed at the time."
|
|
|
