Deriving Methods from an Empty Set

Does the possibility of a method being derived from an empty set pose a problem for the current formulation of the third law? Can we conceive of a situation in which a method is derived from an empty subset?

The Third Law (Sebastien-2016) currently states that a method needs to be derived from some subset of other employed methods and theories. This wording leaves open the possibility that a method could be derived from the empty set. As observational scientonomists we would want to consider this a violation of the third law, but is this different than other potential violations?

In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by William Rawleigh, Gregory Rupik, Nicholas Overgaard and Paul Patton in 2017. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community. At the moment, the question has no accepted answer in Scientonomy.

History

Acceptance Record

Here is the complete acceptance record of this question (it includes all the instances when the question was accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by a community):

Community	Accepted From	Acceptance Indicators	Still Accepted	Accepted Until	Rejection Indicators
Scientonomy	3 March 2017	It was acknowledged as an open question by the Scientonomy Seminar 2017.	Yes

All Theories

According to our records, no theory has attempted to answer this question. If a theory on this descriptive 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.

Related Topics

This topic is a sub-topic of Mechanism of Method Employment.

Contributors

Hakob Barseghyan (2.8%), Jacob MacKinnon (97.2%)