Status of Method and Methodology

Can Method and Methodology be defined such that it doesn't rely on the implicit-explicit distinction?

As formulated in Barseghyan (2015), methods are taken to be implicit, employed rules for theory acceptance whereas methodologies are explicitly formulated rules for theory assessment. Is it possible to formulate the definitions of Method and Methodology in a way that does not make reference to the Implicit-Explicit distinction? Can methodologies be understood as normative theories being about actually employed methods?

In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by Hakob Barseghyan, Calahan Janik-Jones, Patrick Fraser and Christopher Kaumeyer in 2018. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community. At the moment, the question has no accepted answer in Scientonomy.

Scientonomic History

Acceptance Record

Here is the complete acceptance record of this question (it includes all the instances when the question was accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by a community):

Community	Accepted From	Acceptance Indicators	Still Accepted	Accepted Until	Rejection Indicators
Scientonomy	25 January 2018	It was acknowledged as an open question by the Scientonomy Seminar 2018.	Yes

All Theories

According to our records, no theory has attempted to answer this question.

If an answer to this question is missing, please click here to add it.

Accepted Theories

According to our records, no theory on this topic has ever been accepted.

Suggested Modifications

According to our records, there have been no suggested modifications on this topic.

Related Topics

This question is a subquestion of Methodology and Methods.

This topic is also related to the following topic(s):

• Role of Methodology in Scientific Change
• Scope of Scientonomy - Explicit and Implicit
• Method
• Methodology