Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, editor, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, Widget editors
11,019
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Mechanism of Method Employment (view source)
Revision as of 22:37, 3 October 2016
, 22:37, 3 October 2016no edit summary
|Authors List=Hakob Barseghyan,
|Formulated Year=2015
|Prehistory=Prehistory hereA number of philosophers of science addressed this question. [[Thomas Kuhn]], [[Paul Feyerabend]], [[Dudley Shapere]], [[Larry Laudan]], and [[Ernan McMullin]] all suggested that our beliefs about the world shape our methods of theory evaluation. Most noteworthy is [[Larry Laudan]]’s account of changes in drug trial methods. In his ''Science and Values'', Laudan argued that the discovery of previously unaccounted effects resulted in the formulation of new methods of drug testing.[[CiteRef::Laudan (1984)|pp. 38-39]] The same idea has been expressed by Ernan McMullin. In his account of the transition from the Aristotelian Medieval method to the hypothetico-deductive method in the early 18th century, McMullin shows that the employment of the hypothetico-deductivism was a result of accepting that the world is more complex than it appears in our observations.[[CiteRef::McMullin (1988)|pp. 32-34.]] There have been many other attempts at explaining how methods of theory evaluation change. Consider, for instance the reconstructions of Plato’s method performed by David Lindberg, or the proposal of synchronous change in paradigm shifts by Thomas Kuhn.
|History=In the context of scientonomy the answer to this question has been traditionally provided by ''the third law''. Until 2016 it was the third law as formulated by [[Hakob Barseghyan]].[[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015)|p. 54]]
