Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, editor, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, Widget editors
11,022
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|Question=Is the first law a ''tautology'', i.e. can it ''in principle'' be violated?
Tautological Status of the First Law (view source)
Revision as of 20:28, 19 January 2023
, 20:28, 19 January 2023no edit summary
{{Topic
|Subject=The First Law (Barseghyan-2015)
|Topic Type=Descriptive
|Subfield=
|Heritable=
|Question Text Formula=
|Question Title Formula=
|Question=
|Question Title=
|Predicate=is tautological
|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=As any law, [[The First Law (Barseghyan-2015)|the first law]] attempts to forbid certain courses of action, for otherwise it would lack any empirical content and would be a tautology. However, it is not quite clear whether the law in its current formulation can be contradicted by any conceivable situation. So the question is whether the law is tautological or non-tautological, i.e. whether there are circumstances (perhaps the collapse of the society which contains the scientific community) under which the first law can ''in principle'' be violated?
|Parent TopicAuthors List=Mechanism of Scientific InertiaGregory Rupik, Hakob Barseghyan, Nicholas Overgaard, Paul Patton
|Formulated Year=2016
|Prehistory=
|History=
|Current View=
|Parent Topic=Mechanism of Scientific Inertia
|Page Status=Stub
|Editor Notes=
