How should the theory assessment outcome satisfied be defined?
As one of possible theory assessment outcomes, this outcome must be properly defined. Thus, what does it mean to say that a theory's assessment outcome was "satisfied".
In the scientonomic context, this term was first used by Nicholas Overgaard, Hakob Barseghyan and Paul Patton in 2017. The term is currently accepted by Scientonomy community.
In Scientonomy, the accepted definition of the term is:
- The theory is deemed to conclusively meet the requirements of the method employed at the time.
|Community||Accepted From||Acceptance Indicators||Still Accepted||Accepted Until||Rejection Indicators|
|Scientonomy||5 February 2017||That's when Patton, Overgaard, and Barseghyan (2017) became published, which is an indication that the question itself is considered legitimate.||Yes|
|Outcome Satisfied (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)||The theory is deemed to conclusively meet the requirements of the method employed at the time.||2017|
|Community||Theory||Accepted From||Accepted Until|
|Scientonomy||Outcome Satisfied (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)||29 November 2017|
|Modification||Community||Date Suggested||Summary||Verdict||Verdict Rationale||Date Assessed|
|Sciento-2017-0004||Scientonomy||5 February 2017||Accept the reformulation of the second law which explicitly links theory assessment outcomes with theory acceptance/unacceptance. To that end, accept three new definitions for theory assessment outcomes (satisfied, not satisfied, and inconclusive) as well as the new ontology of theory assessment outcomes, and accept the new definition of employed method.||Accepted||The new formulation of the law became accepted as a result of a communal consensus. It was noted by the commentators that the "modification provides a much improved formulation of the 2nd law".c1 It was noted that the new formulation "decouples the method from acceptance outcomes" and "is needed to avoid a contradiction for cases where assessment by the method is inconclusive, but the theory is accepted".c2 It was agreed that the new law eliminates two of the major flaws of the previous formulation. First, it clearly states the relations between different assessment outcomes and the actual theory acceptance/unacceptance. Second, it clearly forbids certain conceivable courses of events and, thus, doesn't sounds like a tautology.c3||29 November 2017|
In Scientonomy, the accepted definition of the term is Outcome Satisfied (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017).
Outcome Satisfied (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017) states: "The theory is deemed to conclusively meet the requirements of the method employed at the time."
To say that a theory's assessment by a method produced the outcome "satisfied" is the same as to say that the theory conclusively met the requirements of the method.
There is currently no accepted view concerning the existence of outcome satisfieds.
No classes are currently accepted as being disjoint with this class.
No classes are currently accepted as subtypes of an outcome satisfied.
No classes are currently accepted as supertypes of an outcome satisfied.
No associations of an outcome satisfied are currently accepted.
If a question concerning the ontology of an outcome satisfied is missing, please add it here.
If a question concerning the dynamics of an outcome satisfied is missing, please add it here.