Scientific Mosaic (Barseghyan-2015)

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is a definition of Scientific Mosaic that states "A set of all accepted theories and employed methods."

Scientific Mosaic Theory Method Class Diagram.png

This definition of Scientific Mosaic was formulated by Hakob Barseghyan in 2015.1

Scientonomic History

Acceptance Record

Here is the complete acceptance record of this definition:
CommunityAccepted FromAcceptance IndicatorsStill AcceptedAccepted UntilRejection Indicators
Scientonomy1 January 2016The definition became de facto accepted by the community at that time together with the whole theory of scientific change.No17 May 2020The definition became reject when it was replaced by Scientific Mosaic (Barseghyan-2018).

Suggestions To Reject

These are all the modifications where the rejection of this definition has been suggested:

Modification Community Date Suggested Summary Verdict Verdict Rationale Date Assessed
Sciento-2018-0009 Scientonomy 8 October 2018 Accept the new definition of scientific mosaic as a set of all epistemic elements accepted and/or employed by the epistemic agent. Accepted Initially, the modification raised an objection from Patton who argued that the modification "is not acceptable at present, because it contains a term; epistemic agent, which has not yet been defined within scientonomy".c1 This objection received two counterarguments. According to Barseghyan, the lack of such a definition of epistemic agent should not "be taken as a reason for postponing the acceptance of the definition of scientific mosaic", since inevitably any taxonomy contains terms that "rely in their definitions on other (yet) undefined terms".c2 This point was seconded by Rawleigh who argued that the definition of scientific mosaic is to be accepted regardless of whether there is an accepted definition of epistemic agent, since "it's de facto accepted already that some agent is required to have a mosaic".c3 In early 2020, Patton dropped his objection as he found that there was "sufficient general understanding of what an epistemic agent is to accept this definition of the scientific mosaic, even without first accepting a definition of epistemic agent".c4 Additionally, Rawleigh argued that the definition is to be accepted since we have "already accepted the revised question-theory ontology".c5 17 May 2020

Question Answered

Scientific Mosaic (Barseghyan-2015) is an attempt to answer the following question: What is scientific mosaic? How should it be defined?

See Scientific Mosaic for more details.


According to this definition, scientific mosaic encompasses all accepted theories and employed methods.1p. 5 The definition assumes that theories and methods are the only two fundamental entities that undergo scientific change.1pp. 5-7 The reason the set of theories and methods is called a “mosaic” and not, say, “system” is that the elements of the mosaic may or may not be tightly adjusted; there may be considerable gaps between the elements of the mosaic. For instance, nowadays we realize that there is a considerable gap between general relativity and quantum mechanics and, yet, we do not hesitate to accept both. 2p. 5

While it is not included in the definition, it is understood that the bearer of a mosaic is a scientific community.1p. xi


No reasons are indicated for this definition.

If a reason supporting this definition is missing, please add it here.

Questions About This Definition

There are no higher-order questions concerning this definition.

If a question about this definition is missing, please add it here.


  1. a b c d  Barseghyan, Hakob. (2015) The Laws of Scientific Change. Springer.
  2. ^ Barseghyan(2015)