What is epistemic stance? How should it be defined?
In the scientonomic context, this term was first used by Hakob Barseghyan in 2015. The term is currently accepted by Scientonomy community.
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):
|Accepted From||Acceptance Indicators||Still Accepted||Accepted Until||Rejection Indicators|
|1 January 2016||The term stance became accepted with the inception of the community.||Yes|
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
According to our records, no definition of the term has ever been accepted.
According to our records, there have been no suggested modifications on this term.
While the term is currently lacking an explicit definition, it is roughly understood as the attitude of an epistemic agent towards an epistemic element.
There is currently no accepted answer to this question.
In Scientonomy, it is currently accepted that "There is such a thing as an epistemic stance."
In Scientonomy, no classes are currently accepted as disjoint with Epistemic Stance.
In Scientonomy, the accepted subtypes of Epistemic Stance are:
In Scientonomy, there are currently no accepted supertypes of Epistemic Stance.
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.
If a question concerning the dynamics of an epistemic stance is missing, please add it here.