Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, editor, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, Widget editors
11,019
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|Current View=Currently, ''scientific mosaic'' is defined as a collection of all [[Theory Acceptance|accepted]] theories and [[Employed Method|employed]] methods.[[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015)|p. 5]] ''[[Theory]]'' is defined as any set of propositions, descriptive or normative,[[CiteRef::Sebastien (2016)]] while ''[[Method|method]]'' is defined as a set of requirements employed in theory assessment.[[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015)|p. 3-10]]
At the moment, theories and methods are believed to be the only two fundamental entities that constitute a scientific mosaic. In the TSC, values are not regarded as separate entities within the scientific mosaic. This is because all values can be formulated as methods, there is no essential distinction between the two.[[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015)|p. 6-7]]
While it is not included in the definition, it is understood that the bearer of a mosaic is a [[Scientific Community|scientific community]].[[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015)|p. xi]] The reason for this omission is that there is currently no accepted definition of ''scientific community''.
no edit summary
There has also been debate concerning whether or not scientific methods change over time. The methods of science were once supposed to be fixed. The idea that methods should be included as historically relative elements within a community’s system of beliefs is known as [[Static and Dynamic Methods|the dynamic method thesis]], and was proposed by [[Paul Feyerabend]] in the 1970’s.[[CiteRef::Preston (2016)]][[CiteRef::Feyerabend (1975a)]] In the late 1980's, the question of the existence of static methods became a focal point of the debate between Larry Laudan and John Worrall. In his ''Science and Values'', Laudan (referred to as the 'later Laudan' because his views changed substantially over his career) argued that no method of theory assessment is immune to change. Worrall disagreed, claiming that there are some methods which have persisted throughout all changes.[[CiteRef::Laudan (1984a)]][[CiteRef::Worrall (1988)]][[CiteRef::Laudan (1989a)]][[CiteRef::Worrall (1989)]] The idea that scientific methods change through time is now generally accepted among contemporary historians and philosophers of science.
|History=The term ''scientific mosaic'' was coined by Hakob Barseghyan in 2012 within the context of the [[The Theory of Scientific Change]] (TSC). It was suggested at the outset that a scientific mosaic should be understood as a collection of changeable theories and methods. The mosaic metaphor was chosen because the tiles of a mosaic may be tightly adjusted, or their may be a considerable gap between them. In scientific mosaics there may be considerable gaps, such as that between general relativity and quantum mechanics, despite the fact that both are accepted parts of the mosaic.[[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015)| p. 5]]
|Related Topics=Scientific Change, Theory, Method, Mechanism of Scientific Change, Employed Method, Theory Acceptance,
|Page Status=Needs Editing
