Scope of Scientonomy - Acceptance Use and Pursuit
Should the TSC account for the acceptance of new theories? Should it explain the instrumental use of theories that are not accepted as the best available description of the world? Should it concern scientists decisions to pursue the development of theories?
In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by Hakob Barseghyan in 2015. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community.
In Scientonomy, the accepted answer to the question is:
- Scientonomy ought to address the issue of how transitions from one accepted theory to another take place and what logic governs this evolution, and need not deal in questions of theory pursuit or use.
Contents
Scientonomic History
Acceptance Record
Community | Accepted From | Acceptance Indicators | Still Accepted | Accepted Until | Rejection Indicators |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scientonomy | 1 January 2016 | That is when the community accepted its first answer to this question, the Scope of Scientonomy - Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015), which indicates that the question is itself considered legitimate. | Yes |
All Theories
Theory | Formulation | Formulated In |
---|---|---|
Scope of Scientonomy - Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015) | Scientonomy ought to address the issue of how transitions from one accepted theory to another take place and what logic governs this evolution, and need not deal in questions of theory pursuit or use. | 2015 |
If an answer to this question is missing, please click here to add it.
Accepted Theories
Community | Theory | Accepted From | Accepted Until |
---|---|---|---|
Scientonomy | Scope of Scientonomy - Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015) | 1 January 2016 |
Suggested Modifications
Current View
In Scientonomy, the accepted answer to the question is Scope of Scientonomy - Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015).
Scope of Scientonomy - Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015) states: "Scientonomy ought to address the issue of how transitions from one accepted theory to another take place and what logic governs this evolution, and need not deal in questions of theory pursuit or use."
Scientonomy currently recognizes several different stances that an epistemic community might take towards a theory. The community might accept the theory as the best currently available description of the world, it might regard a theory as worthy of pursuit and further development, or it might regard the theory as adequate for use for some practical purpose, while not the best description of the world. 1 These stances, and their opposites (i.e. that a theory is unaccepted, neglected, or unused)together constitute the range of stances that a community might take towards a theory. The concept of a scientific mosaic consisting of the set of all theories accepted, and all methods employed by the community 1 is central to scientonomy, as is the goal of explaining all changes in this mosaic. To fulfill this central goal, a scientonomic theory ought to explain how transitions from one accepted theory to another take place, and what logic governs that transition, but it doesn't necessarily need to explain why some theories are pursued and others neglected and why some are used and others remain unused. 1
Related Topics
This question is a subquestion of Scope of Scientonomy.
This topic is also related to the following topic(s):
- Theory Use
- Theory Pursuit
- Ontology of Scientific Change
- Scope of Scientonomy - Explicit and Implicit
- Scope of Scientonomy - Construction and Appraisal
- Scope of Scientonomy - Descriptive and Normative
- Scope of Scientonomy - Individual and Social
- Scope of Scientonomy - Time Fields and Scale
- Epistemic Stances Towards Theories
- Theory Acceptance