Property:Formulation Text
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This is a property of type Text.
A
Criteria for determining whether a theory is ''acceptable'' or ''unacceptable.'' +
Criteria for determining whether a theory is ''acceptable'' or ''unacceptable.'' +
A group that does not have a collective intentionality. +
A group that does not have a collective intentionality. +
The commentators of suggested modifications are allowed to suggest reformulations of the original formulations in the comments. By default, the new formulation should bear the original author’s name, unless the author decides to give credit to those who significantly contributed to the new reformulation. +
At the level of metatheory, the relevant evidence for assessing a scientonomic theory ''ought to be'' the facts relating to the state of the ''scientific mosaic'' and its ''transitions''. The complete list of relevant phenomena that ought to be considered can ''only'' be identified for a specific scientonomic theory. +
At the level of metatheory, the relevant evidence for assessing a scientonomic theory ''ought to be'' the facts relating to the state of the ''scientific mosaic'' and its ''transitions''. The complete list of relevant phenomena that ought to be considered can ''only'' be identified for a specific scientonomic theory. +
At the level of metatheory, the relevant evidence for assessing a scientonomic theory ''ought to be'' the facts relating to the state of the ''scientific mosaic'' and its ''transitions''. The complete list of relevant phenomena that ought to be considered can ''only'' be identified for a specific scientonomic theory. +
At the level of metatheory, the relevant evidence for assessing a scientonomic theory ''ought to be'' the facts relating to the state of the ''scientific mosaic'' and its ''transitions''. The complete list of relevant phenomena that ought to be considered can ''only'' be identified for a specific scientonomic theory. +
A [[Community|community]] can [[Authority Delegation|delegate authority]] to another community. +
A [[Question|question]] can presuppose [[Theory|theories]]. A [[Theory|theory]] is an answer to a [[Question|question]]. +
A [[Question|question]] can presuppose [[Theory|theories]]. A [[Theory|theory]] is an answer to a [[Question|question]]. +
The employment of new methods can ''be'' but is not ''necessarily'' a result of the acceptance of new theories. +
Community A is said to be delegating authority over topic ''x'' to community B ''iff'' (1) community A accepts that community B is an expert on topic ''x'' and (2) community A will accept a theory on topic ''x'' if community B says so. +
Epistemic agent A is said to be delegating authority over question ''x'' to epistemic agent B ''iff'' (1) agent A accepts that agent B is an expert on question ''x'' and (2) agent A will accept a theory answering question ''x'' if agent B says so. +
Epistemic agent A is said to be delegating authority over question ''x'' to epistemic agent B ''iff'' (1) agent A accepts that agent B is an expert on question ''x'' and (2) agent A will accept a theory answering question ''x'' if agent B says so. +
B
Only a community can be a bearer of a scientific mosaic. +
C
If an accepted theory is taken as the final truth, it will always remain accepted; no new theory on the subject can ever be accepted. +
A modification should be accepted by default if there are no objections within a 90-day period following its publication. +
The verdict on a suggested modification should be decided by a communal vote that will follow the discussion period. +
A group that has a collective intentionality. +
A [[Community|community]] can [[Authority Delegation|delegate authority]] to another community. +
A community can consist of other communities. +
There is no such thing as a [[Community|community]]. +
There is such a thing as a [[Community|community]]. +
The ability of two elements to coexist in the same mosaic. +
At any moment of time, the elements of the scientific mosaic are compatible with each other. +
Criteria for determining whether two theories are ''compatible'' or ''incompatible.'' +
Criteria for determining whether two elements are compatible or incompatible. +
Criteria for determining whether two elements are compatible or incompatible. +
[[Compatibility]] is a subtype of [[Epistemic Stance]], i.e. epistemic stance is a supertype of compatibility. +
If a pair of elements satisfies the compatibility criteria employed at the time, it becomes compatible within the mosaic; if it does not, it is deemed incompatible; and if assessment is inconclusive, the pair can become compatible, incompatible, or its status may be unknown. +
At any moment of time, the elements of the scientific mosaic are compatible with each other. +
The ability of two elements to coexist in the same mosaic. +
The possible outcomes of theory assessment are ''satisfied'', ''not satisfied'', and ''inconclusive''. +
Theory assessment is an assessment of a proposed modification of the mosaic by the method employed at the time. +
The contextual appraisal theorem is a deductive consequence of the first law and the second law. +
A core question of a discipline is a question identified in the discipline’s delineating theory as definitive of the discipline. +
A core theory of a discipline is a theory presupposed by the discipline’s core questions. +
D
A method becomes employed only when it is deducible from some subset of other employed methods and accepted theories of the time. +
A statement of the meaning of a term. +
There is such a thing as a [[Definition|definition]]. +
[[Definition]] is a subtype of [[Theory]], i.e. theory is a supertype of definition. +
A statement of the meaning of a term. +
A second-order theory identifying the set of core questions of a discipline. +
Criteria for determining whether a theory is ''scientific'' or ''unscientific.'' +
Criteria for determining whether a theory is ''scientific'' or ''unscientific.'' +
Every theory that becomes accepted satisfies the demarcation criteria employed at the time of acceptance. +
A set of propositions that attempts to describe something. +
There is such a thing as a [[Descriptive Theory|descriptive theory]]. +
[[Descriptive Theory]] is a subtype of [[Theory]], i.e. theory is a supertype of descriptive theory. +
A set of propositions that attempts to describe something. +
Transitions from one state of the mosaic to another are not necessarily deterministic. Scientific change is not a strictly deterministic process. The process of method change is not necessarily deterministic: employed methods are by no means the only possible implementations of abstract requirements. The process of theory change is not necessarily deterministic: there may be cases when both a theory's acceptance and its unacceptance are equally possible. +
A discipline is characterized by (1) a non-empty set of core questions ''Q'' and (2) the delineating theory stating that ''Q'' are the core questions of the discipline. +
A discipline is said to be accepted by an epistemic agent if that agent accepts the core questions specified in the discipline’s delineating theory as well as the delineating theory itself. +
If an accepted theory is taken as the final truth, it will always remain accepted; no new theory on the subject can ever be accepted. +
The ''dogmatism no theory change'' theorem is a deductive consequence of the first law, the second law, and the third law. +
All substantive methods are necessarily dynamic. +
The ''dynamic substantive methods'' theorem follows from the synchronism of method rejection theorem and fallibilism. +
E
There is such a thing as [[Element Decay|element decay]]. +
[[Element Decay|Element Decay]] is a non-scientonomic phenomenon. +
A method is said to be ''employed'' at time ''t'' if, at time ''t'', theories become accepted only when their acceptance is permitted by the method. +
A method is said to be employed if its requirements constitute the actual expectations of the community. +
An action of an epistemic agent that involves an epistemic element. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Action|epistemic action]]. +
An agent capable of taking epistemic stances towards epistemic elements. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Agent|epistemic agent]]. +
An agent capable of taking epistemic stances towards epistemic elements. +
A community that has a collective intentionality to know the world. +
A non-epistemic community can consist of epistemic communities. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Community|epistemic community]]. +
[[Epistemic Community]] is a subtype of [[Epistemic Agent]], i.e. epistemic agent is a supertype of epistemic community. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Element|epistemic element]]. +
A theory is said to be an epistemic presupposition of a question for some agent, ''iff'' the agent accepts that accepting any direct answer to the question will necessitate accepting the theory. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Presupposition|epistemic presupposition]]. +
A theory is said to be an epistemic presupposition of a question for some agent, ''iff'' the agent accepts that accepting any direct answer to the question will necessitate accepting the theory. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Stance|epistemic stance]]. +
The stances of [[Theory Acceptance|theory acceptance]], [[Theory Pursuit|theory pursuit]] and [[Theory Use|theory use]] can be taken towards a [[Theory|theory]]. +
The stance of [[Compatibility|compatibility]] can be taken towards an [[Epistemic Element|epistemic element]]. +
The stance of [[Compatibility|compatibility]] can be taken towards an [[Epistemic Element|epistemic element]]. +
The stances of [[Theory Acceptance|theory acceptance]], [[Theory Pursuit|theory pursuit]] and [[Theory Use|theory use]] can be taken towards a [[Theory|theory]]. +
The stance of [[Compatibility|compatibility]] can be taken towards an [[Epistemic Element|epistemic element]]. +
The stance of [[Compatibility|compatibility]] can be taken towards an [[Epistemic Element|epistemic element]]. +
The list of possible stances towards a method is limited to ''employment''. +
The stance of [[Norm Employment|norm employment]] can be taken towards a [[Normative Theory|normative theory]]. +
The stance of compatibility can be taken towards an epistemic element. +
The stances of [[Theory Acceptance|theory acceptance]], [[Theory Pursuit|theory pursuit]] and [[Theory Use|theory use]] can be taken towards a [[Theory|theory]]. +
The stance of [[Norm Employment|norm employment]] can be taken towards a [[Normative Theory|normative theory]]. +
The stance of [[Compatibility|compatibility]] can be taken towards an [[Epistemic Element|epistemic element]]. +
The stance of [[Norm Employment|norm employment]] can be taken towards a [[Normative Theory|normative theory]]. +
The stances of [[Theory Acceptance|theory acceptance]], [[Theory Pursuit|theory pursuit]] and [[Theory Use|theory use]] can be taken towards a [[Theory|theory]]. +
The stance of [[Question Acceptance|question acceptance]] can be taken towards a [[Question|question]]. +
The stance of [[Compatibility|compatibility]] can be taken towards an [[Epistemic Element|epistemic element]]. +
The stance of [[Question Acceptance|question acceptance]] can be taken towards a [[Question|question]]. +
The stance of [[Scientificity|scientificity]] can be taken towards a [[Theory|theory]]. +
The stance of [[Theory Acceptance|theory acceptance]] can be taken towards a [[Theory|theory]]. +
The stance of [[Theory Pursuit|theory pursuit]] can be taken towards a [[Theory|theory]]. +
The stance of [[Theory Use|theory use]] can be taken towards a [[Theory|theory]]. +
The stances of [[Theory Acceptance|theory acceptance]], [[Theory Pursuit|theory pursuit]] and [[Theory Use|theory use]] can be taken towards a [[Theory|theory]]. +
