The Law of Theory Demarcation is Not a Tautology (Sarwar-Fraser-2018)

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to navigation Jump to search

An attempt to answer the question of Tautological Status of the Law of Theory Demarcation which states "The law of theory demarcation is not a tautology."

The Law of Theory Demarcation is Not a Tautology was formulated by Patrick Fraser and Ameer Sarwar in 2018.1

History

Acceptance Record

This theory has never been accepted.

Suggestions To Accept

Here are all the modifications where the acceptance of this theory has been suggested:
ModificationCommunityDate SuggestedSummaryVerdictVerdict RationaleDate Assessed
Sciento-2018-0014Scientonomy28 December 2018Accept the law of theory demarcation as a new scientonomic axiom. Also accept questions concerning indicators of scientificity as legitimate topics of scientonomic inquiry.Open

Question Answered

The Law of Theory Demarcation is Not a Tautology (Sarwar-Fraser-2018) is an attempt to answer the following question: Is the law of theory demarcation a tautology, i.e. can it in principle be violated?

See Tautological Status of the Law of Theory Demarcation for more details.

Description

The law of theory demarcation is not a tautology, because it is in principle violable, i.e. it forbids certain logical possibilities.1 In particular, if the assessment outcomes by the demarcation criteria are conclusively satisfied, then it is impossible for the theory's status to be unscientific or uncertain. Similarly, if a theory conclusively fails to satisfy the demarcation criteria employed by an epistemic agent, then it is impossible for the theory to be considered scientific or uncertain. Given the prohibition of these four possibilities, the law of theory demarcation is not tautological.


Reasons

No reasons are indicated for this theory.

References

  1. a b  Sarwar, Ameer and Fraser, Patrick. (2018) Scientificity and The Law of Theory Demarcation. Scientonomy 2, 55-66. Retrieved from https://www.scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/31275.