editor, Administrators
500
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Role of Non-Social and Environmental Factors in Scientific Change (view source)
Revision as of 01:01, 15 April 2017
, 01:01, 15 April 2017Created page with "{{Topic |Question=In addition to interactions between people in a community, what role do interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment have on the pro..."
{{Topic
|Question=In addition to interactions between people in a community, what role do interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment have on the process of scientific change?
|Topic Type=Descriptive
|Description=While it is evident that sociocultural factors play some role in the process of scientific change, there is an equally important question to be answered regarding the interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment. This question requires answering how biological factors and evolutionary direction play a role in the process of scientific change. For example, it is possible that two communities held different beliefs about tigers: the first believed that tigers were dangerous and should be avoided, while the second believed that tigers posed no threat. In this scenario, the first community would have survived, while latter would likely die off. Would this be a good illustration of the environment affecting theory acceptance? Or does this question ultimately result in trivialities?
|Authors List=Karl Loszak, Paul Patton,
|Formulated Year=2017
|Academic Events=Scientonomy Seminar 2017,
}}
|Question=In addition to interactions between people in a community, what role do interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment have on the process of scientific change?
|Topic Type=Descriptive
|Description=While it is evident that sociocultural factors play some role in the process of scientific change, there is an equally important question to be answered regarding the interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment. This question requires answering how biological factors and evolutionary direction play a role in the process of scientific change. For example, it is possible that two communities held different beliefs about tigers: the first believed that tigers were dangerous and should be avoided, while the second believed that tigers posed no threat. In this scenario, the first community would have survived, while latter would likely die off. Would this be a good illustration of the environment affecting theory acceptance? Or does this question ultimately result in trivialities?
|Authors List=Karl Loszak, Paul Patton,
|Formulated Year=2017
|Academic Events=Scientonomy Seminar 2017,
}}
