Sufficient Reason theorem (Palider-2019)
This is an answer to the question Sufficient Reason and Theory Acceptance that states "A theory becomes accepted by an agent, when an agent has a sufficient reason for accepting it."
Sufficient Reason theorem was formulated by Kye Palider in 2019.1
Suggestions To Accept
Here are all the modifications where the acceptance of this theory has been suggested:
|Modification||Community||Date Suggested||Summary||Verdict||Verdict Rationale||Date Assessed|
|Sciento-2019-0011||Scientonomy||23 December 2019||Accept the sufficient reason theorem and its deduction from the definition of sufficient reason and the second law.||Open|
Sufficient Reason theorem (Palider-2019) is an attempt to theory the following question: What role do sufficient reasons play in theory acceptance?
See Sufficient Reason and Theory Acceptance for more details.
The Sufficient Reason theorem shows how a sufficient reason leads to acceptance. This theorem follows from the definition of a Sufficient Reason (Palider-2019) and from The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017). By the second law, if a theory satisfies the acceptance criteria of the method employed at the time, it becomes accepted. The claim of this theorem is that if there is a sufficient reason for a theory, then that theory satisfies the acceptance criteria of the time. This claim is justified as follows.
The fourth condition of a sufficient reason states that the sufficient reason, alongside the employed method of the time, normatively infers (see Normative Inference (Palider-2019)) that the agent should accept the reasoned for theory. This statement is stipulated to mean that the acceptance criteria of the time are satisfied. However, it should be understood as further explicating what it means for the acceptance criteria to be satisfied, rather than simply being equated to a previously vague notion. It specifies that the Support (Palider-2019) (in condition 2 of a sufficient reason) constitutes strong enough "evidence" for the method to deem the supported theory as one that should be accepted. The conclusion that the supported theory should be accepted roughly means that the assessment of the theory is conclusive, i.e. conclusively in favour of acceptance. By this understanding of normative inference, as explaining what satisfying acceptance criteria means, it follows that when there is a sufficient reason, acceptance criteria are satisfied, hence the supported theory becomes accepted.
One thing to note within the second law is that acceptance could potentially occur if assessment is inconclusive. The connection between normative inference and inconclusive assessments has not been explored, but one possible idea is that inconclusive assessments are those that include a permissible normative operator in the conclusion of normative inference.
No reasons are indicated for this theory.
If a reason supporting this theory is missing, please add it here.
Questions About This Theory
There are no higher-order questions concerning this theory.
If a question about this theory is missing, please add it here.
- ^ Palider, Kye. (2019) Reasons in the Scientonomic Ontology. Scientonomy 3, 15-31. Retrieved from https://scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/33557.