Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
{{Topic
|Question=How do ''methods'' become ''employed'' by a community in theory assessment?
|Topic Type=Descriptive
|Question=How do ''methods'' become ''employed'' by a community in theory assessment?
|Description=When the classical philosophy of science finally came to terms with the fact that methods of theory assessment do in fact change through time, the question became how exactly they change. Since circa 1980, explaining the process of transitions from one employed method to the next has been one of the most challenging tasks for any theory of scientific change. A proper answer to this key question helps to understand one of the key aspects of scientific change.
|Parent Topic=Mechanism of Scientific Change
|History=In the context of scientonomy the answer to this question has been traditionally provided by ''the third law''. Until 2016 it was the third law as formulated by [[Hakob Barseghyan]].[[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015)|p. 54]]
In this 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 Sebastien in 2016. In her reformulation of the law, Sebastien made explicit that an employed method need not necessarily follow from ''all'' other employed methods and accepted theories but only from ''some'' of them. This made it possible for an employed method to be logically inconsistent and yet [[The Zeroth Law|''compatible]] '' with openly accepted [[Methodology|methodological dicta]].
|Related Topics=Mechanism of Theory Acceptance, Role of Sociocultural Factors in Scientific Change,
|Related Theories=The Third Law (Barseghyan-2015), The Third Law (Sebastien-2016),

Navigation menu