Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0002

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Commenting on this modification is closed; the modification is accepted.

Hakob Barseghyan

91 months ago
Score 0

After the solution of the paradox of normative propositions, I see no obstacles for including normative propositions into the mosaic. The paradox was the reason why normative propositions (such as those of methodology) were excluded from our ontology in the first place. Now they have to be brought back.

My verdict: accept.

Nicholas Overgaard

90 months ago
Score 0
My verdict, too, is to accept this modification. We have an understanding of what Zoe means by "normative propositions", and I believe they certainly play a role in the process of scientific change. So why not adopt the belief that these normative propositions are actually part of our ontology? There is no openly accepted reason against including them. Let's bring them back so that we can understand the important influence of not only descriptive but also normative theories on the process of scientific change.

Paul Patton

90 months ago
Score 0
My verdict is also to accept the modification without qualms. Following the resolution of the paradox of normative propositions, there seems no good reason to exclude normative theories from the TSC, and many reasons why they should be included. Including them, for example, would allow us to grasp the role that methodological and ethical rules play in science. The proposed change to the definition of acceptance is simply for the purpose of acknowledging that normative as well as descriptive theories can be accepted into the mosaic.

You are not allowed to post comments.