What is community? How should it be defined?
While some groups of people seem to have a merely accidental nature (e.g. the group of left handed Armenian smokers), others are clearly more than a result of coincidence. The question is what makes such groups different from mere accidental groups.
In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by Nicholas Overgaard in 2016. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community. Community (Overgaard-2017) is currently accepted by Scientonomy community as the best available definition of the term. Community (Overgaard-2017) states "A group that has a collective intentionality."
|Community||Accepted From||Acceptance Indicators||Still Accepted||Accepted Until||Rejection Indicators|
|Scientonomy||19 May 2017||The question became accepted with the publication of Overgaard's A Taxonomy for Social Agents of Scientific Change.Overgaard (2017)||Yes|
|Community (Overgaard-2017)||A group that has a collective intentionality.||2017|
|Community||Theory||Accepted From||Accepted Until|
|Scientonomy||Community (Overgaard-2017)||2 February 2018|
|Modification||Community||Date Suggested||Summary||Verdict||Verdict Rationale||Date Assessed|
|Sciento-2017-0012||Scientonomy||19 May 2017||Accept a new taxonomy for group and its two sub-types - accidental group, and community.||Accepted||A consensus has emerged after a long discussion that the distinction and the respective definitions should be accepted. It was noted that "these formulations tend to be the starting point for so many of our discussions"c1 and that "despite all disagreements that this taxonomy causes, it is actually accepted by the community".c2 Yet, it was also indicated that whereas the definition of group as "two or more people that share a characteristic" is the best we have at the moment, it may be potentially necessary to pursue the idea of redefining it as "one or more people..." to allow for one-scientist communities.c3 Finally, while a question was raised whether there is any "value in defining accidental groups as something separate from groups",c4 it was eventually agreed that it is important to draw "a clear distinction between the two kinds of groups as accidental groups and communities".c5||2 February 2018|
This topic is also related to the following topic(s):