Changes

|Topic Type=Descriptive

|Subfield=Dynamics

|Heritable=Yes

|Question Title Formula=Necessary <Subjects>

|Question=

|Question Title=

|Object Type=Text

|Object Value True=

|Answer Title Formula=

|Description=What epistemic elements, if any, are necessary for the process of scientific change to occur?

|Formulated Year=2015

|Prehistory=Although the scientonomic notion of necessary mosaic elements is unique to scientonomy, the notion of necessary knowledge has been covered extensively within the philosophy of science. In Descartes’ Meditations, he presents the famous cogito ergo sum argument as a justification for the a priori necessity of existential knowledge of some aspect of ‘the self’ irrespective of physical experience. He argues that, even if one doubts the existence and nature of the physical world, they still have knowledge of at least one objective truth in the world, namely, knowledge of their own intellectual existence. Likewise, Leibniz used his principle of sufficient reason to argue for the a priori necessity of the Uniformity of Nature, that is, that we know the universe behaves in similar ways under similar circumstances. He argued that if we accept his principle, we are lead to conclude that similar circumstances yield similar phenomena as there is a similar reason for the same phenomena to obtain. Kant also introduced his a priori forms, universal causation and substance-property dualism, as necessary components of our understanding of physical reality. The conception of necessary elements in scientific mosaics is analogous to these notions of a priori necessary metaphysical knowledge of the world.

|History=

|Page Status=Stub

|Editor Notes=

}}

{{Acceptance Record