Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
{{Modification
|Summary=Accept a new taxonomy for ''theory'', ''normative theory'', ''descriptive theory'' to reintroduce normative propositions (such as those of ethics or methodology) to the scientific mosaic.
|Question Answered=Theory,
|Year Suggested=2016
|Authors List=Zoe Sebastien
|Resource=Sebastien (2016)
|Authors List=Zoe Sebastien|Preamble=Currently, a [[theory]] is defined as a set of propositions that attempts to describe something. This definition excludes ''normative propositions'' from the scope of the TSC. Normative theories, such as those of methodology or ethics, have been excluded since including them appears to give rise to a destructive paradox first identified by Joel Burkholder. There are many historical cases where employed [[Method|scientific methods]] are known to conflict with professed [[Methodology|methodologies]]. This seems to violate [[The Third Law|the third]] and [[The Zeroth Law|zeroth laws]] of scientific change. By the third law, employed methods are deducible from accepted theories. But, this seems impossible in cases where methodologies and methods conflict. Under the zeroth law, all elements in the scientific are compatible with one another. But, that seems to be clearly not the case if methodologies and methods conflict with one another.
|Modification=Define ''theory'' as "a set of propositions" and include normative and descriptive propositions as subcategories of theories with methodology as a subcategory of normative theory:
[[File:Acceptance_Sebastien_2016.png|center|307px]]
|Parent Modification=
|Verdict=Open
|Year Assessed=
|Verdict Rationale=
}}

Navigation menu