What is group? How should it be defined?
As any other term referring to social agents of scientific change, group deserves a proper definition.
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. Group (Overgaard-2017) is currently accepted by Scientonomy community as the best available definition of the term. It is defined as: "Two or more people who share any characteristic."
|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.||Yes|
|Group (Overgaard-2017)||Two or more people who share any characteristic.||2017|
|Community||Theory||Accepted From||Accepted Until|
|Scientonomy||Group (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|
In Overgaard's taxonomy, the term group refers to the most basic societal entity - a set of two or more people. As such, it is meant to play the role of the most abstract class which has two sub-classes - community and accidental group.1
There is currently no accepted view concerning the existence of groups.
No classes are currently accepted as being disjoint with this class.
No classes are currently accepted as subtypes of a group.
No classes are currently accepted as supertypes of a group.
No associations of a group are currently accepted.
If a question concerning the ontology of a group is missing, please add it here.
If a question concerning the dynamics of a group is missing, please add it here.
This term is also related to the following topic(s):
- Overgaard, Nicholas. (2017) A Taxonomy for the Social Agents of Scientific Change. Scientonomy 1, 55-62. Retrieved from https://www.scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/28234.