editor, Administrators
2,020
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
• Although not explicitly stated by the TSC, it seems obvious that in order to become a contender for acceptance, a theory must meet the requirements of the demarcation criteria outlined by the employed method of the time. Given this, is it possible for employed methods to shape theory construction? In addition, it seems as though other elements of the mosaic play a part in shaping theory construction. For example, the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics could not have been built without prior acceptance of the formalism of Hilbert Spaces in mathematics. In what way does our mosaic impose constraints on theory construction? (Jennifer Whyte, 2016)
no edit summary
• Scientists often seem to rely on practical propositions when conduction research— e.g “when conducting an experiment, chose the cheapest technique capable of producing acceptable results”. What is the status of practical propositions like these in the mosaic? Are they normative theories, or a separate entity? How are they accepted into the mosaic, and how do they change through time? How do they affect other elements of the mosaic? Do they affect method employment? (Hakob Barseghyan, Paul Patton, 2016)
|Related Topics=Theory, Scientific Mosaic
}}
