Changes

|Question=What does deducibility in the [[The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)|Third Lawthe law of method employment]] mean? Does it refer to the deducibility of Classic Logicclassic logic, or to a logic accepted by the community at the time?

|Description=The current formulation of the Third Law requires law of method employment asserts that a method be becomes employed when it is deducible from at least a subset of some accepted theories and employed methods. However, it remains open is unclear as to what ''deducibility'' here is to mean, as the notion of deducibility varies with reference from logic to the logic assumed, as well as perhaps the definition of a [[Theory]].

One approach is to assume that newly employed methods must be deducible in the rules of Classical Logicclassical logic, but this runs the risk of historical anachronism. The immediate alternative would be to assume that methods must be deducible in the rules of the logic accepted by the community at the time, but this poses an issue for observational scientonomy, in that it allows potential 'hand-waving.' If the employment of a method would violate the Third Lawlaw of method employment, then it can be posited that the community agent in question merely accepted a different logic, especially without establishing indicators of the accepted logic. Lastly, it was discussed whether the notion of ''deducibility'' is required in the Mechanism of Method Employment at all.

|Authors List=Patrick Fraser, Calahan Janik-Jones,Patrick Fraser

|Academic Events=Scientonomy Seminar 2018,|Prehistory=|History=|Current View=|Related Topics=Deriving Methods from an Empty Set, Employed Method,