Property:Formulation Text
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This is a property of type Text.
E
The stance of [[Compatibility|compatibility]] can be taken towards an [[Epistemic Element|epistemic element]]. +
A physical object or system is an epistemic tool for an epistemic agent ''iff'' there is a procedure by which the tool can provide an acceptable source of knowledge for answering some question under the employed method of that agent. +
An epistemic agent is said to commit an error if the agent accepts a theory that should not have been accepted given that agent’s employed method. +
The handling of instances of scientific error is consistent with the theory rejection theorem; it involves a replacement of an erroneously accepted theory either with a first- or second-order proposition. +
An epistemic agent is said to commit an error if the agent accepts a theory that should not have been accepted given that agent’s employed method. +
There is such a thing as a [[Community|community]]. +
There is such a thing as a [[Definition|definition]]. +
There is such a thing as a [[Descriptive Theory|descriptive theory]]. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Agent|epistemic agent]]. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Community|epistemic community]]. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Element|epistemic element]]. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Presupposition|epistemic presupposition]]. +
There is such a thing as an [[Epistemic Stance|epistemic stance]]. +
There is such a thing as an [[Individual Epistemic Agent|individual epistemic agent]]. +
There is such a thing as a [[Logical Presupposition|logical presupposition]]. +
There is such a thing as a [[Normative Theory|normative theory]]. +
There is such a thing as [[Question Acceptance|question acceptance]]. +
There is such a thing as a [[Question|question]]. +
There is such a thing as [[Theory Acceptance|theory acceptance]]. +
There is such a thing as a [[Theory|theory]]. +
Propositional knowledge that hasn’t been openly formulated by the agent. +
Propositional knowledge that hasn’t been openly formulated by the agent. +
Propositional knowledge that has been openly formulated by the agent. +
[[Explicit]] is a subtype of [[Epistemic Element]], i.e. epistemic element is a supertype of explicit. +
G
An epistemic action that is available to all epistemic agents trans-historically and universally. +
There is such a thing as a [[Global Epistemic Action|global epistemic action]]. +
[[Global Epistemic Action]] is a subtype of [[Epistemic Action]], i.e. epistemic action is a supertype of global epistemic action. +
The goal of peer reviews in the scientonomic workflow is evaluation for ''pursuitworthiness'' rather than ''acceptability''. +
Two or more people who share any characteristic. +
H
The encyclopedia editors should be granted official housekeeping rights to handle the ripple effects. If the additional required changes are ''implicit'' in the suggested modification, the editors should create and alter encyclopedia pages to ensure that the accepted body of scientonomic knowledge is properly documented; if it is conceivable to accept the modification ''without'' accepting the ripple effect change in question, the editors should register these changes as new suggested modifications so that the community can discuss and evaluate them in an orderly fashion. +
A sub-type of multiple authority delegation where different communities are delegated different degrees of authority over topic ''x''. +
A sub-type of multiple authority delegation where different epistemic agents are delegated different degrees of authority over question ''x''. +
[[Hierarchical Authority Delegation]] is a subtype of [[Authority Delegation]], i.e. authority delegation is a supertype of hierarchical authority delegation. +
A sub-type of multiple authority delegation where different epistemic agents are delegated different degrees of authority over question ''x''. +
A descriptive discipline that attempts to trace and explain ''individual'' changes in the scientific mosaic. +
A descriptive discipline that attempts to trace and explain ''individual'' changes in the scientific mosaic. +
I
A method becomes employed only when it is deducible from some subset of other employed methods and accepted theories of the time. +
A logical transition from one theory to another. +
Not explicit. +
[[Implicit]] is a subtype of [[Epistemic Element]], i.e. epistemic element is a supertype of implicit. +
When two mutually incompatible theories satisfy the requirements of the current method, the mosaic necessarily splits in two. When a theory assessment outcome is inconclusive, a mosaic split is possible. When a mosaic split is a result of the acceptance of only one theory, it can only be a result of inconclusive theory assessment. +
The ''employed method'' of theory appraisal of a community at some time is not necessarily indicated by the ''methodological texts'' of that time and must be inferred from ''actual patterns'' of theory acceptance and other ''indirect evidence''. +
The ''employed method'' of theory appraisal of a community at some time is not necessarily indicated by the ''methodological texts'' of that time and must be inferred from ''actual patterns'' of theory acceptance and other ''indirect evidence''. +
''Indicators of theory acceptance'' are textual sources that represent the position of a scientific community regarding a theory at some time. Useful indicators are ''contextual'' to time and culture. They might include such things as ''encyclopedias'', ''textbooks'', ''university curricula'', and ''minutes of association meetings''. +
''Indicators of theory acceptance'' are textual sources that represent the position of a scientific community regarding a theory at some time. Useful indicators are ''contextual'' to time and culture. They might include such things as ''encyclopedias'', ''textbooks'', ''university curricula'', and ''minutes of association meetings''. +
There is such a thing as an [[Individual Epistemic Agent|individual epistemic agent]]. +
[[Individual Epistemic Agent]] is a subtype of [[Epistemic Agent]], i.e. epistemic agent is a supertype of individual epistemic agent. +
The level of the beliefs of the individual scientist about the world and the rules she employs in theory assessment. +
The level of the beliefs of the individual scientist about the world and the rules she employs in theory assessment. +
Non-propositional knowledge, i.e. knowledge that cannot, even in principle, be formulated as a set of propositions. +
Non-propositional knowledge, i.e. knowledge that cannot, even in principle, be formulated as a set of propositions. +
Inferring Theory Assessment Outcomes from Acceptance or Unacceptance of Two Contenders (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017) +
There is a series of inferences that can be made from the acceptance or unacceptance of two contender theories. +
Inferring Theory Assessment Outcomes from Acceptance or Unacceptance of a Single Contender (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017) +
There is a series of inferences that can be made from the acceptance or unacceptance of a single contender. +
L
A local action ''A'' is said to be available to an epistemic agent ''iff'' that agent employs the norm “''A'' is permissible/desirable”. +
A local epistemic action becomes available to an agent only when its permissibility/desirability is derivable from a non-empty subset of other elements of the agent’s mosaic. +
The ''local action availability'' theorem is a deductive consequence of the ''law of norm employment'' and the definition of ''local action availability'' +
An epistemic action that is not available trans-historically to all epistemic agents, but is specific to some time periods or some agents. +
There is such a thing as a [[Local Epistemic Action|local epistemic action]]. +
[[Local Epistemic Action]] is a subtype of [[Epistemic Action]], i.e. epistemic action is a supertype of local epistemic action. +
A theory is said to be a logical presupposition of a question, ''iff'' the theory is logically entailed by any direct answer to the question. +
There is such a thing as a [[Logical Presupposition|logical presupposition]]. +
A theory is said to be a logical presupposition of a question, ''iff'' the theory is logically entailed by any direct answer to the question. +
M
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. +
A theory becomes rejected only when other theories that are incompatible with the theory become accepted. +
The handling of instances of scientific error is consistent with the theory rejection theorem; it involves a replacement of an erroneously accepted theory either with a first- or second-order proposition. +
A method becomes employed only when it is deducible from some subset of other employed methods and accepted theories of the time. +
A method ceases to be employed only when other methods that are incompatible with the method become employed. +
When two mutually incompatible theories satisfy the requirements of the current method, the mosaic necessarily splits in two. When a theory assessment outcome is inconclusive, a mosaic split is possible. When a mosaic split is a result of the acceptance of only one theory, it can only be a result of inconclusive theory assessment. +
A method becomes employed only when it is deducible from some subset of other employed methods and accepted theories of the time. +
A theory becomes rejected only when other theories that are incompatible with the theory become accepted. +
A methodology can shape employed methods, but only if its requirements implement abstract requirements of some other employed method. +
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. +
A method becomes employed only when it is deducible from some subset of other employed methods and accepted theories of the time. +
A method ceases to be employed only when other methods that are incompatible with the method become employed. +
When two mutually incompatible theories satisfy the requirements of the current method, the mosaic necessarily splits in two. When a theory assessment outcome is inconclusive, a mosaic split is possible. When a mosaic split is a result of the acceptance of only one theory, it can only be a result of inconclusive theory assessment. +
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. +
If a theory satisfies the acceptance criteria of the method employed at the time, it becomes accepted into the mosaic; if it does not, it remains unaccepted; if assessment is inconclusive, the theory can be accepted or not accepted. +
An element of the mosaic remains in the mosaic unless replaced by other elements. +
Sociocultural factors can affect the process of theory acceptance insofar as it is permitted by the method employed at the time. +
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 theory becomes rejected only when other theories that are incompatible with the theory become accepted. +
An element of the mosaic remains in the mosaic unless replaced by other elements. +
An accepted theory remains accepted unless replaced by other theories. +
An element of the mosaic remains in the mosaic unless replaced by other elements. +
An employed method remains employed unless replaced by other methods. +
An employed method remains employed unless replaced by other methods. +
An accepted theory remains accepted unless replaced by other theories. +
An element of the mosaic remains in the mosaic unless replaced by other elements. +
An element of the mosaic remains in the mosaic unless replaced by other elements. +
An accepted theory remains accepted unless replaced by other theories. +
If a theory satisfies the acceptance criteria of the method employed at the time, it becomes accepted into the mosaic; if it does not, it remains unaccepted; if assessment is inconclusive, the theory can be accepted or not accepted. +
A theory becomes rejected only when other theories that are incompatible with the theory become accepted. +
A set of requirements for employment in theory assessment. +
A set of criteria for theory evaluation. +
A set of methods is said to constitute a hierarchy ''iff'' theories that satisfy the requirements of methods that are higher in the hierarchy are preferred to theories that satisfy the requirements of methods that are lower in the hierarchy. +
There is such a thing as a [[Method Hierarchy|method hierarchy]]. +
[[Method]] is a subtype of [[Epistemic Element]], i.e. epistemic element is a supertype of method. +
