Changes

|History=In the context of scientonomy the answer to this question has been traditionally provided by [[The Third Law|the third law]]. Until 2017 it was Barseghyan's [[The Third Law (Barseghyan-2015)|original third law]].[[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015)|p. 54]] In that formulation, it wasn't clear whether employed methods follow from ''all'' or only ''some'' of the accepted theories and employed methods of the time. This led to a logical paradox which was [[Modification:Sciento-2016-0001|resolved]] by [[Zoe Sebastien]]. In her Sebastien's [[The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)|reformulation of the law]], Sebastien made it explicit that an employed method need not necessarily follow from ''all'' other employed methods and accepted theories but only from ''some'' of them.[[CiteRef::Sebastien (2016)]] This made it possible for an employed method to be logically inconsistent and yet ''compatible'' with openly accepted [[Methodology|methodological dicta]]. Sebastien's formulation became accepted in 2017.