Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
no edit summary
According to this formulation of the second law, if a theory satisfies the acceptance criteria of the method actually employed at the time, then it becomes accepted into the mosaic; if it does not, it remains unaccepted; if it is inconclusive whether the theory satisfies the method, the theory can be accepted or not accepted.
Unlike [[The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015)|the previous formulation of the second law]], the this formulation makes the causal connection between ''theory assessment outcomes'' and ''cases of theory acceptance/unacceptance'' explicit. In particular, it specifies what happens to a theory in terms of its acceptance/unacceptance when a certain assessment outcome obtains.
In addition, this new formulation is clearly ''not'' a tautology because it forbids certain logically possible scenarios, such as a theory satisfying the method of the time yet remaining unaccepted.
In short, a new formulation of the second law was required that would fix these flaws. Thus, a new formulation was proposed which explicitly stated causal relationships between different theory assessment outcomes and actual cases of theory acceptance/unacceptance. By forbidding a number of logically possible combinations (e.g. Satisfied → Not Accept), this formulation made it clear that the law is ''not'' a tautology.
|Page Status=Editor Approved
|Editor Notes=
}}
{{Acceptance Record

Navigation menu