Changes

|Preamble=In 2018 , [[Maxim Mirkin]] and [[Sinan Karamehmetoglu]] [[Mechanism of Error Rejection| Maxim Mirkin and Sinan Karamehmetoglu raised the issue]] of whether cases of scientific error were compatible with [[Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)| the theory rejection theorem]]. These authors They were concerned that it appeared as though, in cases of errorhandling, a theory was simply being removed from the mosaic due to its being recognized as an error without being replaced by another any other theory. The [[The First Law|The first law of scientific change]] states that "an element of the mosaic remains in the mosaic unless replaced by other elements". The first law, together with the [[Compatibility Corollary (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)| compatibility corollary]] can be used to deduce [[Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)| the theory rejection theorem]], which states that "A theory becomes rejected only when other theories incompatible with the theory become accepted".

Patton and Machado-Marques [[CiteRef::Machado-Marques and Patton (2021)]] Having analyzed several instances of scientific error and showed , we show that scientific error handling, when properly analyzed, is fully consistent with the theory rejection theorem. They argued that instances [[CiteRef::Machado-Marques and Patton (2021)]] Instances of scientific error typically involve the rejection of one or more of the premises of the argument that leads to the erroneous conclusion as well as the conclusion itself. In most cases, first-order propositions of the original erroneously accepted theory are replaced by other first-order propositions incompatible with them. In some cases, however, first-order propositions are replaced by second-order propositions asserting the lack of sufficient reason for accepting these first-order propositions. In both cases, such a replacement is fully consistent with the theory rejection theorem.