Property:Acceptance Indicators
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This is a property of type text.
A
Associations of Question became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Question]]. This is when Rawleigh's [[Rawleigh (2018)|The Status of Questions in the Ontology of Scientific Change]] that offered a definition of ''question'' was published. This is a good indication that the question of how ''question'' is to be defined is considered legitimate by the community. +
Associations of Scientific Mosaic became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Scientific Mosaic]]. This is when the community accepted its first definition of the term, [[Scientific Mosaic (2015)]], which indicates that the question is itself considered legitimate. +
Associations of Subdiscipline became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Subdiscipline]]. This is when Patton and Al-Zayadi's [[Patton and Al-Zayadi (2021)|''Disciplines in the Scientonomic Ontology'']] that offered a definition of the term was published. This is a good indication that the question of how the term is to be defined is considered legitimate by the community. +
Associations of Theory Acceptance became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Theory Acceptance]]. This is when the community accepted its first definition of the term, [[Theory Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015)]], which indicates that the term itself became accepted. +
Associations of Theory Pursuit became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Theory Pursuit]]. +
Associations of Theory Use became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Theory Use]]. +
Associations of Theory became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Theory]]. The term became accepted together with the rest of the original TSC. +
The theorem became de facto accepted by the community at that time together with the whole theory of scientific change. +
The definition became accepted as a result of the acceptance of the respective [[Modification:Sciento-2016-0003|suggested modification]]. +
The definition became accepted as a result of the acceptance of the [[Modification:Sciento-2019-0017|respective modification]]. +
The publication of the article by Overgaard and Loiselle titled [[Overgaard and Loiselle (2016)|Authority Delegation]] is a good indication of acceptance of the question.[[CiteRef::Overgaard and Loiselle (2016)]] +
B
This claim was tacitly accepted even before its explicit formulation in 2018. Thus, it has the same acceptance date as the rest of the original TSC. +
It was acknowledged as an open question by the [[Scientonomy Seminar 2016]]. +
C
This is when the first answer to the question was accepted, the [[Dogmatism No Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015)]], indicating that the question is itself legitimate. +
The definition became accepted as a result of the acceptance of the respective [[Modification:Sciento-2017-0012|suggested modification]]. +
The definition of the term that assumed this association was accepted as a result of the acceptance of the respective [[Modification:Sciento-2016-0003|suggested modification]]. +
The existence of communities has been accepted since the inception of scientonomy. +
The question became accepted with the publication of Overgaard's [[Overgaard (2017)|''A Taxonomy for Social Agents of Scientific Change'']]. +
The definition became accepted as a result of the acceptance of the respective [[Modification:Sciento-2018-0015|suggested modification]]. +
The corollary became accepted as a result of the acceptance of the respective [[Modification:Sciento-2018-0015|suggested modification]]. +
