Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
}}
A community's [[Scientific Mosaic|mosaic]] consists of the set of all accepted [[Theory|theories]] accepted and employed [[Method|methods]] employed by the that community at some particular time. How do disciplinary boundaries exist within the mosaic: are they expressible as theories and/or methods? Is the statement of disciplinary boundaries a mere definition of a discipline, a description of what a discipline has been doing, or a normative prescription of what a discipline ought to do. For example, when physicists say "Physics is the study of physical processesthe nature and properties of matter and energy", it's not quite clear whether this is meant as a definition, description or prescription. It can have three different meanings:* '''definition''': physics, ''by definition'', is the study of physical processesthe nature and properties of matter and energy;* '''description''': physics ''has been'' studying physical processesthe nature and properties of matter and energy; * '''prescription''': physics ''ought to'' study physical processesthe nature and properties of matter and energy.
Is it possible that actual disciplinary boundaries are some kind of a combination of the three? If that is so, then how are the definition of a discipline, its description and its prescription interrelated? The task is to clarify the exact nature of disciplinary boundaries.
|Parent Topic=Epistemic Elements
2,020

edits

Navigation menu