Difference between revisions of "Scientific Underdeterminism theorem (Barseghyan-2015)"

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 10: Line 10:
 
{{PrintDiagramFile|diagram file=Scientific-underdetermination.jpg}}
 
{{PrintDiagramFile|diagram file=Scientific-underdetermination.jpg}}
 
|Resource=Barseghyan (2015)
 
|Resource=Barseghyan (2015)
 +
|Page Status=Needs Editing
 
}}
 
}}
 
{{Acceptance Record
 
{{Acceptance Record

Revision as of 20:16, 11 July 2017

This is an answer to the question Determinism vs. Underdeterminism in Scientific Change that states "Transitions from one state of the mosaic to another are not necessarily deterministic. Scientific change is not a strictly deterministic process."

Scientific-underdeterminism-box-only.jpg

Scientific Underdeterminism theorem was formulated by Hakob Barseghyan in 2015.1 It is currently accepted by Scientonomy community as the best available answer to the question.

Scientonomic History

Acceptance Record

Here is the complete acceptance record of this theory:
CommunityAccepted FromAcceptance IndicatorsStill AcceptedAccepted UntilRejection Indicators
Scientonomy1 January 2016The theorem became de facto accepted by the community at that time together with the whole theory of scientific change.Yes

Question Answered

Scientific Underdeterminism theorem (Barseghyan-2015) is an attempt to answer the following question: Is the process of scientific change a strictly deterministic process? Will two unconnected communities experience a similar historical series of changes in their individual mosaics?

See Determinism vs. Underdeterminism in Scientific Change for more details.

Description

Scientific underdetermination is the thesis that the process of scientific change is not deterministic, and science could have evolved differently than it did. Hypothetically, two scientific communities developing separately could experience an entirely different sequence of successive states of their respective scientific mosaics. Even without the TSC, the implausibility of scientific determinism can be seen by considering the process of theory construction, which is outside the present scope of the TSC. Theory construction requires creative imagination, and the formulation of a given theory is therefore not inevitable. Still, underdetermination can also be inferred as a theorem from the axioms of the TSC.1pp. 196-198

Scientific-underdetermination.jpg

Reasons

No reasons are indicated for this theory.

If a reason supporting this theory is missing, please add it here.

Questions About This Theory

There are no higher-order questions concerning this theory.

If a question about this theory is missing, please add it here.

References

  1. a b  Barseghyan, Hakob. (2015) The Laws of Scientific Change. Springer.