Changes

|Description=It is presently accepted that there are historical Historical indicators that can be used as evidence that to assess whether certain epistemic stances have been were taken by epistemic agents in the pasttowards an element. Sarwar and Fraser present ''scientificity'', a new epistemic stance that may be taken toward theories, and as such, in order to understand whether theories were considered to be scientific or unscientific by a particular community, one must understand what the indicators of different assessment outcomes of scientificity are.[[CiteRef::Sarwar and Fraser (2018)]] In particular, it is unclear precisely when assessment may be inconclusive.

Noting that there are the historical indicators for conclusive assessment of theory acceptance or method employmentassessments are likely to be more definitve, Sarwar and Fraser state that "it is unclear whether indicators can be found to determine if evaluation by the demarcation criteria took place. This is mostly due to the fact that scientists may presumably keep track of only those theories that are accepted ... Thus, there is a legitimate question concerning the indicators of scientificity. Once this question is reasonably answered, one may also try to locate historical indicators that could tell us whether an assessment for scientificity was conclusive or inconclusive. It is conceivable that we may find solid indicators of conclusive assessments, while having trouble locating indicators of inconclusive assessments". [[CiteRef::Sarwar and Fraser (2018)|p. 62]] It is further postulated that if there is definite lack of evidence about the scientific status of a theory, this may itself indicate an inconclusive assessment outcome.