Epistemic Stance

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to navigation Jump to search

What is epistemic stance? How should it be defined?

In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by Hakob Barseghyan in 2015. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community. At the moment, the term has no accepted definition in Scientonomy.

Scientonomic History

Acceptance Record

Here is the complete acceptance record of this term (it includes all the instances when the term was accepted as a part of a community's taxonomy):
CommunityAccepted FromAcceptance IndicatorsStill AcceptedAccepted UntilRejection Indicators
Scientonomy1 January 2016The term stance became accepted with the inception of the community.Yes

All Theories

According to our records, no definition of the term has been suggested.If a definition of this term is missing, please click here to add it.

Accepted Theories

According to our records, no definition of the term has ever been accepted.

Suggested Modifications

According to our records, there have been no suggested modifications on this term.

Current Definition




While the term is currently lacking an explicit definition, it is roughly understood as the attitude of an epistemic agent towards an epistemic element.

Ontology

Existence

In Scientonomy, it is currently accepted that "There is such a thing as an epistemic stance."

Disjointness

In Scientonomy, no classes are currently accepted as disjoint with Epistemic Stance.

Subtypes

In Scientonomy, the following subtypes of Epistemic Stance are currently accepted:

Supertypes

In Scientonomy, there are currently no accepted supertypes of Epistemic Stance.

Associations

In Scientonomy, there are currently no accepted associations of Epistemic Stance.


If a question concerning the ontology of an epistemic stance is missing, please add it here.

Dynamics

If a question concerning the dynamics of an epistemic stance is missing, please add it here.