Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, editor, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, Widget editors
11,020
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|Parent Topic=Ontology of Scientific Change|Authors List=Kevin Zheng, Hakob Barseghyan,Kevin Zheng
no edit summary
{{Topic
|QuestionSubject=Who can be a ''bearer'' of a ''mosaic''? Can a ''community'' be a bearer of a mosaic? Can an ''individual'' be a bearer of a mosaic? Can an ''instrument'' be a bearer of a mosaic?
|Topic Type=Descriptive
|Subfield=
|Inherited From=
|Heritable=
|Question Text Formula=
|Question Title Formula=
|Question=
|Question Title=
|Predicate=
|Object Type=
|Object Value True=
|Object Value False=
|Object Class=
|Object Enum Values=
|Object Regexp=
|Single Answer Text Formula=
|Multiple Answers Text Formula=
|Answer Title Formula=
|Description=An agent is defined as an entity with a capacity to act.[[CiteRef::Schlosser (2015)]] The actions in question for an epistemic agent are epistemic actions such as taking [[Epistemic Stance|stances]] towards [[Epistemic Element|epistemic elements]] or being the bearer of a [[Scientific Mosaic|scientific mosaic]]. The question at issue is who or what can be a bearer of a mosaic. Can individuals bear a mosaic, or communities, or perhaps artificial systems such as databases or instruments? For example, consider a [[Epistemic Community|community]] that [[Authority Delegation|delegates authority]] over a certain topic to its sub-community. Then this sub-community delegates authority over a sub-topic of this topic to its sub-sub-community. Finally, this sub-sub-community delegates one very specific question to a single expert. Does this mean that an individual scientist can bear a mosaic?
|Formulated Year=2016
|Academic Events=Scientonomy Seminar 2016,
|Prehistory==== Individual human beings ===
For most of the history of western science and philosophy, human individuals were treated as the sole or primary epistemic agents. The question of how to explain and justify the capacities of human individuals as epistemic agents has long been of interest. In the early modern period, [[Rene Descartes]] (1596-1650) [[CiteRef::Descartes (2004)]][[CiteRef::Descartes (2017)]] and [[John Locke]] (1711-1776) [[CiteRef::Locke (2015)]] produced classic works on these matters. Their theory of ideas maintained that all of our experiences were of ideas in our own minds, some of these ideas being caused by our senses. Descartes maintained that he could show through reason alone that our senses, being the gifts of an omnibenevolent God, were reliable sources of knowledge about an external world of material objects.
=== Scientific Instruments ===
|History=In the scientonomic context, the question of who can bear a mosaic was raised in 2016. In 2018, the term epistemic agent was coined,[[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2018)]] which led to the rephrasing of the question as an ontological question concerning [[Subtypes of Epistemic Agent|the types of epistemic agents]]. As a result, this question has been superseded by the [[Subtypes of Epistemic Agent]] question.|Current View=|Parent Topic=Ontology of Scientific Change|Related Topics=Scientific Community, Applicability of the Laws of Scientific Change, Scientific Mosaic, Epistemic Stances Towards Theories,Scientific Community, Scientific Mosaic
|Page Status=Needs Editing
|Editor Notes=
}}
{{Acceptance Record
|Accepted From Approximate=Yes
|Acceptance Indicators=It was acknowledged as an open question by the [[Scientonomy Seminar 2016]].
|Still Accepted=YesNo|Accepted Until Era=CE|Accepted Until Year=2018|Accepted Until Month=October|Accepted Until Day=8
|Accepted Until Approximate=No
|Rejection Indicators=Following the publication of [[Barseghyan's redrafted ontology|Barseghyan (2018)]] that coined the term [[Epistemic Agent|epistemic agent]], the question was superseded by the of [[Subtypes of Epistemic Agent]].
}}
