Changes

|Prehistory=The current statement of this question is the product of a long prior history. [[Hans Reichenbach]] is commonly considered The precursor to have been the first to draw distinction between theory construction and theory appraisal was the distinction between the context of discovery, which is a historical and creative process having to do with the construction of the theory, and the context of justification, which is the supposedly distinct logical enterprise of the defense and appraisal of a theory. This distinction was first explicitly drawn by [[Hans Reichenbach]]. [[CiteRef::Laudan (1980)]] The distinction It was implicit in works of scientific methodology going back to the nineteenth century, and has been traced by Popper back to Kant. [[CiteRef::Popper (1959)]] The idea that the historical context of discovery can be clearly distinguished from the logical context of justification was questioned by [[Norwood Hanson|Hanson]], [[Thomas Kuhn|Kuhn]], and [[Paul Feyerabend|Feyerabend]], who argued that the two were thoroughly intertwined. [[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015) |p. 23]][[CiteRef::Feyerabend (1975a) |p. 149]]  Paul Hoyningen-Huene proposed a lean distinction between the two contexts, proposing that they are simply two different perspectives that can be taken towards scientific knowledge. he He did not suppose that discovery and justification are two distinct processes, thereby sidestepping earlier objections. [[CiteRef::Hoyningen-Huene (2006) |pp. 128-130]] Accepting this lean distinction, Barseghyan [[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015) |pp. 23-25]] argued that the terms 'discovery' and 'justification' are misleading. 'Discovery' is generally taken to refer to an epistemic achievement that has been positively appraised, such as the discovery of the planet Neptune. The term 'construction', he supposes, is better suited to refer to the creative processes by which new theories are formulated. These processes are generally seen to lie within the subject matter of psychology and sociology. Theories undergo a process of appraisal by a scientific community. Thus, we speak of the questions of theory construction and theory appraisal, which, as for Hoyningen-Huene, can overlap with one anotherinvolves reasoning processes. Barseghyan [[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015) |pp. 23-30]] further argues that both theory construction and theory appraisal have both This question is a normative and a descriptive question associated with them (i.e. how about what scientonomy ought theories to be constructed?take as its subject matter, how are theories constructed?theory construction, how ought theories to be appraised?theory appraisal, how are theories appraised?)or both. Thus scientonomy must determine which among these four possible questions are within its scope. Part of this question has to do with the question of whether