Epistemic Stance
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.
Contents
Scientonomic History
Acceptance Record
Community | Accepted From | Acceptance Indicators | Still Accepted | Accepted Until | Rejection Indicators |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scientonomy | 1 January 2016 | The term stance became accepted with the inception of the community. | Yes |
All Theories
Accepted Theories
Suggested Modifications
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:
- The main subtypes of Epistemic Stance are Theory Use, Theory Pursuit, Question Acceptance, Norm Employment, Compatibility and Theory Acceptance.
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.