Tautological Status of The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015)
Is Barseghyan's original second law a tautology?
As any law, Barseghyan's original second law attempts to forbid certain courses of action, for otherwise it would lack any empirical content and would be a tautology. Thus, the question is whether Barseghyan's original second law is tautological or non-tautological, i.e. whether there are any conceivable courses of events under which the second law can in principle be violated.
In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by Rory Harder in 2013. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community.
In Scientonomy, the accepted answer to the question is:
- Barseghyan's original second law is tautological.
Contents
Scientonomic History
Acceptance Record of the Question
Community | Accepted From | Acceptance Indicators | Still Accepted | Accepted Until | Rejection Indicators |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scientonomy | 1 January 2016 | The question became accepted with the acceptance of the original theory of scientific change. | Yes |
All Direct Answers
Theory | Formulation | Formulated In |
---|---|---|
The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015) | Barseghyan's original second law is tautological. | 2015 |
If a direct answer to this question is missing, please click here to add it.
Accepted Direct Answers
Community | Theory | Formulation | Accepted From | Accepted Until |
---|---|---|---|---|
Scientonomy | The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015) | Barseghyan's original second law is tautological. | 1 January 2016 |
Suggested Modifications
Current View
In Scientonomy, the accepted answer to the question is The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015).
The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015) states: "Barseghyan's original second law is tautological."
According to Barseghyan's initial position, "the second law is not a law in the traditional sense, for normally a law is supposed to have some empirical content, i.e. its opposite should be conceivable at least in principle. Obviously, the second law is a tautology, since it follows from the definition of employed method".1
Related Topics
References
- ^ Barseghyan, Hakob. (2015) The Laws of Scientific Change. Springer.