Difference between revisions of "Role of Non-Social and Environmental Factors in Scientific Change"

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{Topic |Question=In addition to interactions between people in a community, what role do interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment have on the pro...")
 
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|Question=In addition to interactions between people in a community, what role do interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment have on the process of scientific change?
 
|Question=In addition to interactions between people in a community, what role do interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment have on the process of scientific change?
 
|Topic Type=Descriptive
 
|Topic Type=Descriptive
|Description=While it is evident that sociocultural factors play some role in the process of scientific change, there is an equally important question to be answered regarding the interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment. This question requires answering how biological factors and evolutionary direction play a role in the process of scientific change. For example, it is possible that two communities held different beliefs about tigers: the first believed that tigers were dangerous and should be avoided, while the second believed that tigers posed no threat. In this scenario, the first community would have survived, while latter would likely die off. Would this be a good illustration of the environment affecting theory acceptance? Or does this question ultimately result in trivialities?
+
|Description=While it is evident that sociocultural factors play some role in the process of scientific change, there is an equally important question to be answered regarding the interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment. This question requires answering how biological factors and evolutionary direction play a role in the process of scientific change. For example, it is possible that two communities held different beliefs about tigers: the first believed that tigers were dangerous and should be avoided, while the second believed that tigers posed no threat. In this scenario, the first community would have survived, while latter would likely die off. Thus, the question seeks to elucidate whether or not there are theories which are selected for biological or evolutionary reasons, or are restricted by cognitive constraints.
|Authors List=Karl Loszak, Paul Patton,
+
 
 +
It is also important to note that this question does not seek to examine instances of natural disasters, or instances in which a tragedy occurs due to something beyond our control.
 +
|Authors List=Karl Loszak, Paul Patton, Calahan Janik-Jones,
 
|Formulated Year=2017
 
|Formulated Year=2017
 
|Academic Events=Scientonomy Seminar 2017,
 
|Academic Events=Scientonomy Seminar 2017,
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 01:09, 15 April 2017

In addition to interactions between people in a community, what role do interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment have on the process of scientific change?

While it is evident that sociocultural factors play some role in the process of scientific change, there is an equally important question to be answered regarding the interactions between people and their natural, non-social environment. This question requires answering how biological factors and evolutionary direction play a role in the process of scientific change. For example, it is possible that two communities held different beliefs about tigers: the first believed that tigers were dangerous and should be avoided, while the second believed that tigers posed no threat. In this scenario, the first community would have survived, while latter would likely die off. Thus, the question seeks to elucidate whether or not there are theories which are selected for biological or evolutionary reasons, or are restricted by cognitive constraints. It is also important to note that this question does not seek to examine instances of natural disasters, or instances in which a tragedy occurs due to something beyond our control.

In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by Paul Patton, Karl Loszak and Calahan Janik-Jones in 2017. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community.

Scientonomic History

Acceptance Record

Here is the complete acceptance record of this question (it includes all the instances when the question was accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by a community):
CommunityAccepted FromAcceptance IndicatorsStill AcceptedAccepted UntilRejection Indicators
Scientonomy31 March 2017This question was acknowledged as legitimate in the Scientonomy Seminar 2017.Yes

All Theories

According to our records, no theory has attempted to answer this question.

If an answer to this question is missing, please click here to add it.

Accepted Theories

According to our records, no theory on this topic has ever been accepted.

Suggested Modifications

According to our records, there have been no suggested modifications on this topic.

Current View

There is currently no accepted answer to this question.


Related Topics