Modification:Sciento-2018-0014

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Revision as of 04:55, 27 February 2019 by Hakob Barseghyan (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Modification |Community=Community:Scientonomy |Acronym=Sciento |Summary=Accept the law of demarcation as a new scientonomic axiom. Also accept questions concerning indicator...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Accept the law of demarcation as a new scientonomic axiom. Also accept questions concerning indicators of scientificity as legitimate topics of scientonomic inquiry.

The modification was suggested to Scientonomy community by Patrick Fraser and Ameer Sarwar on 28 December 2018.1 This modification presupposes the acceptance of Sciento-2018-0013. The modification is currently being evaluated; a verdict is pending.

Preamble

TODO: Add preamble

Modification

Theories To Accept

Questions To Accept

  • Indicators of Theory Scientificity: What are the historical indicators of a theory’s scientificity? How can observational scientonomists establish that such-and-such a theory was indeed considered scientific/unscientific by a certain epistemic agent at a certain time?
  • Indicators of Conclusiveness for Scientificity Assessment: What are the historical indicators that an assessment by the demarcation criteria was conclusive or inconclusive? Does the lack of agreement or evidence count in favor of inconclusive assessment outcome?

Questions Answered

This modification attempts to answer the following question(s):

Verdict

The workshop discussion of this modification (25.02.2023)

The modification is currently being evaluated; a verdict is pending. The modification can only become accepted once modification Sciento-2018-0013 becomes accepted.

Click on the Discussion tab for comments.

References

  1. ^  Sarwar, Ameer and Fraser, Patrick. (2018) Scientificity and The Law of Theory Demarcation. Scientonomy 2, 55-66. Retrieved from https://www.scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/31275.