Barseghyan and Levesley (2021)

Barseghyan, Hakob and Levesley, Nichole. (2021) Question Dynamics. Scientonomy 4, 1-19. Retrieved from https://scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/37120.

Title	Question Dynamics
Resource Type	journal article
Author(s)	Hakob Barseghyan, Nichole Levesley
Year	2021
URL	https://scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/37120
DOI	https://doi.org/10.33137/js.v4i0.37120
Journal	Scientonomy
Volume	4
Pages	1-19

Abstract

The paper presents a new scientonomic account of question dynamics. To explain the process of question acceptance and rejection, we begin by introducing the notion of epistemic presupposition and show how it’s different from the notion of logical presupposition. With the notion of epistemic presupposition at hand, we formulate the law of question acceptance, a new scientonomic axiom, which states that a question becomes accepted only if all of its epistemic presuppositions are accepted, and it is accepted that the question is answerable. We then show how the process of question rejection can be explained by means of the question rejection theorem, which states that a question becomes rejected when other elements that are incompatible with the question become accepted. To deduce this theorem in the usual scientonomic fashion (from the first law and the compatibility corollary), we first ascertain that the notion of compatibility/incompatibility is applicable to questions and show that one can legitimately speak of both question-theory and question-question incompatibility. We conclude by providing a quick illustration of the historical applicability of this new framework and suggest a number of questions for future research.

Theories

Here are all the theories formulated in Barseghyan and Levesley (2021):

Theory	Type	Formulation	Formulated In
Epistemic Presupposition (Barseghyan-Levesley-2021)	Definition	A theory is said to be an epistemic presupposition of a question for some agent, iff the agent accepts that accepting any direct answer to the question will necessitate accepting the theory.	2021
Logical Presupposition (Barseghyan-Levesley-2021)	Definition	A theory is said to be a logical presupposition of a question, iff the theory is logically entailed by any direct answer to the question.	2021
Epistemic Presupposition Exists	Descriptive	There is such a thing as an epistemic presupposition.	2021
Logical Presupposition Exists	Descriptive	There is such a thing as a logical presupposition.	2021
The Law of Question Acceptance (Barseghyan-Levesley-2021)	Descriptive	A question becomes accepted only if all of its epistemic presuppositions are accepted and it is accepted that the question is answerable.	2021
The First Law for Questions (Barseghyan-Levesley-2021)	Descriptive	An accepted question remains accepted in the mosaic unless replaced by other elements.	2021
Question Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-Levesley-2021)	Descriptive	A question becomes rejected when other elements that are incompatible with the question become accepted.	2021
Question Can Presuppose Theories (Barseghyan-Levesley-2019)	Descriptive	A question can presuppose theories.	2019

Suggested Modifications

Here are all the modifications suggested in Barseghyan and Levesley (2021):

• Sciento-2021-0001: Accept the definitions of logical presupposition and epistemic presupposition. The modification was suggested to Scientonomy community by Hakob Barseghyan and Nichole Levesley on 1 August 2021.1 The modification was accepted on 6 February 2023. It was emphasized that the "modification is appealing given the presence of questions as a basic class of epistemic element in our ontology and the need to reference their presuppositions in observational scientonomy alongside proposed laws concerning questions in theoretical scientonomy".^c1 The commentators agreed that "an epistemic agent could plausibly accept all the epistemic presuppositions without necessarily accepting all the logical presuppositions".^c2 They also also noted that "accepting separate definitions of logical presupposition and epistemic presupposition would improve the specificity of our communal knowledge - and perhaps our visualization capabilities".^c3 Specifically, "there is clear value in distinguishing logical and epistemic presuppositions in scientonomic diagrams".^c4 Finally, the commentators highlighted the importance of the distinction for the law of question acceptance.^{c5 c6}
• Sciento-2021-0002: Accept the law of question acceptance as a new scientonomic axiom, the question rejection theorem, and a number of questions for future research. The modification was suggested to Scientonomy community by Hakob Barseghyan and Nichole Levesley on 1 August 2021.1 The modification was accepted on 21 February 2024. Prior to the 2024 workshop, Carlin Henikoff left a comment on the encyclopedia affirming that the modification should be accepted, but also stating that it was unclear whether it should be accepted as an axiom, per se. During the 2024 workshop, it was clarified that in our taxonomy, if X follows from something else, it is a theorem, but if not, it is an axiom. At the time of the publication of Levesley and Barseghyan’s paper, Henikoff was engaged in conversations in the scientonomy community about whether the law of question acceptance could be deducible from other scientonomic theorems. This clarified the thrust of her comment; since the law hasn't been shown to follow from any other scientonomic theories, it can only be taken as an axiom. There were also concerns about the phrasing of the law. Specifically, Jamie Shaw highlighted that the acceptance of a question cannot be predicated upon the acceptance of all of its presuppositions, simply because a question can have an infinite number of presuppositions. However, the participants were reminded of the difference between epistemic presuppositions and logical presuppositions (proposed by Levesley and Barseghyan in the previously accepted modification Sciento-2021-0001). While a question can have an infinite number of logical presuppositions (i.e. these are “explosive”), the law explicitly talks about epistemic presuppositions, which are not explosive. The modification was accepted nearly unanimously by over two-thirds majority of votes. 17 out of 18 votes were for acceptance.