Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, editor, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, Widget editors
11,019
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Scope of Scientonomy - Acceptance Use and Pursuit (view source)
Revision as of 03:16, 23 June 2017
, 03:16, 23 June 2017no edit summary
|Question=Ought a scientonomic theory account for the acceptance of new theories by the community? Ought it account for the instrumental use of theories that are not accepted as the best available description of the world? Ought it concern scientists' decisions to pursue the development of new theories?
|Topic Type=Normative
|Description=There has been a long tradition of confusing different stances that a community can take towards a theory. Kuhn , for instance, used a number of different and equally vague words, including ''universally received'',''embraced'', ''acknowledged' ', and ''committed' ', to describe the status of theories within scientific communities. [[CiteRef::Barseghyan Kuhn (20151970c) |ppp. 3010-13]] Sometimes the term 'accepted' is used without clarifying its meaningAcceptance'' too has had a plethora of different meanings. Does it mean that scientists involved in Once the field have declared it to be true? or that they are actually involved in its elaboration? or that they approve taxonomy of its epistemic stances is clarified and we know the difference between ''acceptance'', ''use in practical applications? The question has to do with whether scientonomy needs to develop a taxonomy of possible statuses for scientific theories'', and if so''pursuit'', what it should is important to decide changes in which of these stances ''ought to'' betraced and explained by scientonomy.
|Parent Topic=Scope of Scientonomy
|Authors List=Hakob Barseghyan,
