27
edits
Changes
Asynchronism of Method Employment theorem (Barseghyan-2015) (view source)
Revision as of 20:31, 9 March 2018
, 20:31, 9 March 2018no edit summary
|Description=The theorem states that the employment of a method is not necessarily simultaneous with the acceptance of a new theory. Being a direct logical consequence of [[The Third Law|the third law]], the theorem highlights the fact that some methods are a result of the implementation of some abstract requirements of other methods. In this way, a new method can be devised as a means of resolving a particular creative gap, and subsequently become employed long after the acceptance of the theory that led to the employment of the abstract method.
|Resource=Barseghyan (2015)
|Prehistory=The prehistory to the scientonomic response to the question concerning synchronism versus asynchronism of method employment originates in the thought of Larry Laudan. In his critique of Thomas Kuhn’s synchronicity of change in methods and theories, Laudan purports that change in method/methodology need not presuppose theory changes or paradigm shifts.<ref>http://www.iep.utm.edu/s-change/#SH3c</ref> On the contrary, anomalies can be addressed by methodological or ontological changes instead of theory modifications. Whereas for Kuhn “change is simultaneous rather than sequential,” Laudan provides many counterexamples depicting the opposite state of affairs.<ref>Laudan, L. (1986). Science and Values: The Aims of Science and their Role in Scientific Debate. University of California Press, pg. 69</ref>
For instance, he cites the methodological shift in science from Bacon-Hume-Newton inductivism as evidence of this asynchronism. The inductivism of the seventeenth century precluded the postulation of unobservable entities. However, between 1800-1860 the existence of such entities became mainstream, as evident in the writings of Whewell, Peirce, Helmholtz, Mach, Darwin, Hertz, and others.<ref>Laudan, L. (1986). Science and Values: The Aims of Science and their Role in Scientific Debate. University of California Press, pg. 81-82.</ref> According to Laudan, this methodological change across scientific domains cannot be linked to the theoretical revolutions of the time. This point evidences the independence of methodological change from the status of accepted theories. Other proponents of the asynchronism of method employment include Dudley Shapere.
|Page Status=Needs Editing
}}