Comments log

Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is a log of comments.

Logs
(newest | oldest) View ( | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)
  • 00:28, 3 September 2019 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0007 (This is to record that the consensus concerning this modification emerged primarily off-line, outside of this discussion page. The consensus has manifested on several occasions, including the first scientonomy conference in May 2019 in Toronto.)
  • 00:10, 3 September 2019 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0005 (This is just to note that the acceptance of this modification took place primarily off-line, outside of this discussion page. The consensus on this modification has been manifested on several occasions, including the first scientonomy conference in May...)
  • 23:47, 2 September 2019 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0006 (This is just to capture that following a series of off-line discussions, a consensus has emerged concerning this modification. The consensus has been manifested on several occasions, including the first scientonomy conference in May 2019 in Toronto, wh...)
  • 03:36, 4 March 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0013 (My verdict is to accept, but with strong reservations. Items of the scientonomic ontology, such as stances, are typically intended to identify features of science, or more generally of knowledge systems, that are universally applicable across communiti...)
  • 03:35, 4 March 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs deleted comment #103 on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0013
  • 03:27, 4 March 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0013 (My verdict is to accept, but with strong reservations. Scientonomic concepts, such as stances, are typically intended to identify features of science, or more generally of knowledge systems, that are universally applicable across communities and over h...)
  • 03:51, 18 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0012 (I believe that the modification should be accepted. Mirkin presents arguments that technological knowledge, like scientific knowledge, can be accepted and not just used, and argues that there are no good prior reasons to suppose that technological know...)
  • 03:27, 18 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0011 (I believe that the modification should be accepted. The proposal distinguishes explicit knowledge that has been openly formulated as propositions by an agent, and implicit knowledge that hasn't been so formulated. The only sense in which this is proble...)
  • 21:54, 17 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0014 (There are some problems with the proposed definitions, and which I believe must be addressed before they can be accepted. To address some of the problems raised above regarding the vagueness of a 'collective intentionality to know the world', I suggest...)
  • 20:39, 17 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0010 (I support the acceptance of this modification. As previously conceived, only methods/methodologies could be either implicitly or explicitly employed. This modification opens the way for any epistemic stance or element to be either implicit or explicit,...)
  • 18:29, 17 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0008 (I support the acceptance of this definition. However, its acceptance will require making significant changes to our accepted definitions of ‘normative theory’ and ‘employment’. First ‘norm’ is simply a shortened way of referring to ‘norm...)
  • 18:16, 17 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs deleted comment #92 on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0008
  • 18:14, 17 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0009 (While I support the eventual acceptance of this definition, I believe it is not acceptable at present, because it contains a term; 'epistemic agent', which has not yet been defined within scientonomy. I will be proposing a definition of 'epistemic agen...)
  • 18:09, 17 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs deleted comment #93 on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0009
  • 18:08, 17 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0007 (I support the acceptance of this definition of 'definition'. The main feature that makes 'definition' potentially problematic is that it is being treated as a sub-type of theory, despite the fact that there is a controversy over whether definitions can...)
  • 17:51, 17 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0006 (I support the acceptance of 'Epistemic Elements -Questions and theories'. A definition of both 'Question' and 'Theory' has already been accepted by the scientonomic community. A definition for 'definition' is currently under review. Thus, much within t...)
  • 22:14, 15 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0005 (I support this modification because I believe it does clarify the scientific understanding of methods as normative theories that can be both accepted and employed. As a practical matter, accepting this definition will require a whole series of changes...)
  • 21:50, 15 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0009 (I am opposed to accepting this new definition at present, because it contains a term, 'epistemic agent', which has not yet been defined within scientonomy. I will be proposing a definition of 'epistemic agent' in association with a paper currently unde...)
  • 21:29, 15 February 2019 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0008 (While I support the inclusion of norms and norm employment in our ontology, I am opposed to accepting this definition, because I feel it is unnecessary. The same purpose could be accomplished more simply by making small changes to our accepted definiti...)
  • 01:55, 29 January 2019 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0012 (While clearly more work needs to be done to understand the intricate relationships between technological and scientific knowledge, I agree with Mirkin that technological knowledge is not merely about ''use'': there is such a thing as ''accepted'' techn...)
  • 16:44, 4 November 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0007 (I will try here to sum up the outcome of the numerous offline discussions we've had on this modification in the last year and a half. 1. Concerning the notions of singular and multiple authority delegations: there haven't been any objections and all t...)
  • 22:19, 1 October 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0003 (Paul's comment raises an important question which can be also applied to other epistemic stances, specifically ''theory acceptance''. Just as question acceptance, theory acceptance too seems to allow for three values: * (clearly) accepted; * (clearly)...)
  • 17:22, 29 September 2018 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0004 (We have already accepted questions as epistemic elements towards which epistemic agents can take stances. The stance of question acceptance, at least, seems clear. The question of the 'mechanism' of question acceptance (provided the term 'mechanism' i...)
  • 17:07, 29 September 2018 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0003 (What does question unacceptance mean? Does it mean that the question is deemed an illegitimate topic of inquiry? Or simply that no community consensus exists regarding the legitimacy of the question? Hakob's example of the question of phlogiston's pro...)
  • 14:58, 28 September 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0001 (A quick update on the status of this modification. Following a series of discussions with scientonomists over the past few months, we have come to a consensus: while the current definition seems to be amenable to further improvement (what definition is...)
  • 13:32, 27 September 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0002 (A quick update on the state of this modification. We've had numerous discussions in the community concerning this modification and we have reached a consensus. 1. Patrick's point is taken: technically Will has shown that questions cannot be reduced t...)
  • 22:08, 20 August 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0004 (This modification too seems obvious to me. Provided that the previous modifications are accepted, I see no reason not to accept this one as well. Specifically, if we accept that questions can be accepted or unaccepted, then it becomes important to unde...)
  • 22:03, 20 August 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0003 (This suggested modification seems rather obvious to me. After all, the whole point of adding ''questions'' to the ontology of epistemic elements was that we can legitimately speak of a question being accepted by a certain agent at a certain time. For i...)
  • 21:54, 20 August 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0001 (Two comments on Ameer's comment. 1. The discussion section of a modification is not an opportune place to suggest modifications to the modification. The first reason is that, in the scientonomic workflow we are trying to follow here, any modification...)
  • 21:51, 20 August 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs deleted comment #81 on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0001
  • 21:50, 20 August 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0001 (Two comments on Ameer's comment. # The discussion section of a modification is not an opportune place to suggest modifications to the modification. The first reason is that, in the scientonomic workflow we are trying to follow here, any modification -...)
  • 10:23, 24 June 2018 William Rawleigh talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0001 (Ameer, having not read your paper yet it's difficult for me to fully reply to your concern, however based on what you've said in your comment I think that specifying questions specifically as "topics of scientific inquiry" or as "scientific topics of i...)
  • 22:16, 22 May 2018 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0001 (I would like to propose a modest alteration to the definition of 'question,' which reads "a topic of inquiry." It is not clear from this definition that it is a topic of SCIENTIFIC inquiry. Although I understand that all questions would be under the um...)
  • 03:36, 22 May 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs deleted comment #76 on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0002
  • 02:39, 21 May 2018 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0002 (Criticism 2: Irreducibility of questions to theories Rawleigh asserts that "the major step in interpreting the semantics [of the question] involved is shifting the content from the elements of the proposition to the status of the epistemic agent" (Raw...)
  • 01:55, 21 May 2018 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0002 (I agree with Hakob that formal, logical treatment, though desirable, is not required in empirical science, including in Scientonomy. He is also correct in pointing out that the sort of criticism that characterizes most philosophical discourse, if appli...)
  • 01:20, 21 May 2018 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0002 (I agree with Hakob that)
  • 13:20, 18 May 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0002 (I’d like to begin my response to Patrick Fraser's comment by calling attention to the distinction between two different tasks: 1. evaluating the formal structure of Will Rawleigh's argument for irreducibility of questions to theories/methods; 2. de...)
  • 13:19, 18 May 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs deleted comment #74 on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0002
  • 13:19, 18 May 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0002 (I’d like to begin my response to Patrick Fraser's comment by calling attention to the distinction between two different tasks: 1. evaluating the formal structure of Will Rawleigh's argument for irreducibility of questions to theories/methods; 2. deci...)
  • 08:29, 17 May 2018 Patrick Fraser talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0002 (You move to accept questions as a distinct epistemic element, and argue this by attempting to show that questions exist, they are not theories, and they are not methods. However, is it not also possible that questions may be functions of both theories...)
  • 16:46, 1 February 2018 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (I think the current definition should be accepted. I see no problem with limiting the definition of a group to two or more people, since the interesting feature of a group is that it can potentially possess emergent properties that an individual can no...)
  • 16:46, 1 February 2018 Paul Patton talk contribs deleted comment #71 on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012
  • 16:45, 1 February 2018 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (think the current definition should be accepted. I see no problem with limiting the definition of a group to two or more people, since the interesting feature of a group is that it can potentially possess emergent properties that an individual can not....)
  • 16:45, 1 February 2018 Paul Patton talk contribs deleted comment #70 on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012
  • 16:44, 1 February 2018 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (I think the current definition should be accepted. I see no problem with limiting the definition of a group to two or more people, since the interesting feature of a group is that it can potentially possess emergent properties that an individual can n...)
  • 16:28, 1 February 2018 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0004 (I agree that the current definitions of authority delegation, mutual authority delegation, and one-sided authority delegation, despite their problems, are currently the best available such definitions. They should be accepted, although further work on...)
  • 16:24, 1 February 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0004 (I agree with Paul that there might be more to the notion of mutual delegation than the suggested definition allows. Yet, I also think that we have to separate two issues: it's one thing to ask whether the suggested definition is flawless, it's another...)
  • 15:56, 31 January 2018 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (What has transpired in the past year is that, despite all disagreements that this taxonomy causes, it is actually accepted by the community. One indication of this is the fact that any discussion on the notion of ''community'' normally takes Overgaard'...)
  • 20:49, 29 November 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0005 (Agree with Jacob. Since the new formulation is accepted, there is no rationale for not accepting this modification.)
  • 17:34, 29 November 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0004 (As the author of the previous formulation of the second law, I admit that it was far from perfect. For one, it sounded like a tautology which is not what the law of theory acceptance should do. Its second major flaw...)
  • 20:14, 5 July 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0013 (The concept that a community can consist of other communities seems reasonable. But I do not think that the current definition adequately captures the relationship that must exist between a community and its subcommunities, to make the subcommunity con...)
  • 20:13, 5 July 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs deleted comment #63 on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0013
  • 20:06, 5 July 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0013 (The concept that a community can consist of other communities seems reasonable. But I do not think that the current definition adequately captures the relationship that must exist between a community and its subcommunities, to make the subcommunity con...)
  • 23:05, 4 July 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs deleted comment #50 on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0004
  • 22:52, 4 July 2017 Markus Alliksaar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0007 (While I agree with Paul Patton that it is a matter of observational scientonomy to locate cases of hierarchical authority delegation, I think the concept should be accepted as Mirka Loiselle pointed out the case of hierarchical authority delegation in...)
  • 22:44, 4 July 2017 Markus Alliksaar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0004 (Paul Patton expresses concern about condition 2 of authority delegation: "Mutual authority delegation is likely to pose more problems, since in such cases both the communities in question are likely to be epistemic communities, with theories and metho...)
  • 18:02, 4 July 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0007 (While the concept of singular and multiple authority delegation seem useful additions to the authority delegation concept, the ideas of hierarchical and non-hierarchical authority delegation do not, because they posit as general categories structures o...)
  • 18:00, 4 July 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs deleted comment #59 on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0007
  • 17:58, 4 July 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0007 (While the concept of singular and multiple authority delegation seem useful additions to the authority delegation concept, the ideas of hierarchical and non-hierarchical authority delegation do not, because they posit as general categories structures o...)
  • 12:35, 4 July 2017 Jacob MacKinnon talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0005 (This follows from the new formulation. We should accept this modification.)
  • 12:33, 4 July 2017 Jacob MacKinnon talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0004 (Since it is possible for a theory to satisfy the method of the time, yet remain unaccepted, there is a clear case in which theory acceptance is not causally connected to appraisal. Given the possible outcomes of theory assessment, this modification pro...)
  • 06:11, 4 July 2017 Terese Pierre talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0007 (I believe this modification is a sound an impressive addition to the current scientonomic research and literature on authority delegation, and that delving into and fleshing out the various kinds of authority delegation, and what kind of delegation occ...)
  • 05:37, 4 July 2017 Terese Pierre talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0014 ("Knowing the world" was one of the offhand ideas that initially confused me when I read the paper, and I agree that it should be made clearer if the concept of epistemic community is to be accepted, which I think it should be. Regarding the inclusion o...)
  • 05:28, 4 July 2017 Terese Pierre talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (Where I most agree with this modification is regarding the taxonomy of group, accidental group and community. Therefore, I do not agree with Max's proposed disregard of the accidental group category. I think having a taxonomy makes terms clearer, unles...)
  • 03:27, 4 July 2017 Calahan Janik-Jones talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (This being said, regarding Hakob's comment above, given that these formulations tend to be the starting point for so many of our discussions, perhaps the reservations I'm talking about as best as a future modification to this modification's proposed th...)
  • 03:24, 4 July 2017 Calahan Janik-Jones talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (I think before accepting this modification, I think a proper discussion is warranted here on the definition of a group. Is it right to smuggle in, with this taxonomy, that a group necessarily consists of two or more people? Especially considering that...)
  • 02:53, 4 July 2017 Calahan Janik-Jones talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0003 (Overall, I agree with Max that this modification fits well within (what I believe ought to be) the purview of observational scientonomy. Even if this isn't an in-depth, comprehensive review of the MASM, I feel that this modification is worth accepting...)
  • 02:30, 3 July 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs deleted comment #51 on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0014
  • 02:30, 3 July 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0014 (Test)
  • 20:54, 2 July 2017 Markus Alliksaar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0004 (Paul Patton is concerned about condition 2. Personally, I do not see it but perhaps I am missing something. For instance, Patton says: "Mutual authority delegation is likely to pose more problems, since in such cases both the communities in question...)
  • 17:47, 2 July 2017 Maxim Mirkin talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0014 (I don't see any issue with epistemic communities enveloping religions as well as scientific communities. Given communities can exist within communities this doesn't create any problems (if the [Sciento-2017-0013] modification is accepted). If any furth...)
  • 17:42, 2 July 2017 Maxim Mirkin talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0015 (Once again, I'm struggling to see the purpose of this clarification in terms of its sheer utility. If we accept this modification why not accept that accidental groups can consists of larger accidental groups and add that in as a separate modification?...)
  • 17:36, 2 July 2017 Maxim Mirkin talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0013 (Assuming the previous modification is accepted, there seem to be no restrictions in place stopping a community from being made up of multiple communities. Verdict: Accept.)
  • 17:31, 2 July 2017 Maxim Mirkin talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (Before I make any inquiries into what seems to be very intuitive I'd like to say I want to accept this modification. It seems that groups can either be communities, or they can just remain groups (as accidental groups). Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but...)
  • 17:23, 2 July 2017 Maxim Mirkin talk contribs deleted comment #45 on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012
  • 17:23, 2 July 2017 Maxim Mirkin talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (Before I make any inquiries into what seems to be very intuitive I'd like to say I want to accept this modification. It seems that groups can either be communities, or they can just remain groups(as accidental groups). Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but t...)
  • 16:58, 2 July 2017 Maxim Mirkin talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0003 (I agree with this modification. Given the lack of textbooks, encyclopedias, etc. it is perfectly reasonable to rely on authoritative texts to determine what was a part of the MASM. There seems to be no immediate or obvious alternative and insofar as cl...)
  • 02:15, 2 July 2017 Jacob MacKinnon talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0014 (If we accept this definition of ''epistemic community'', then we must also be able to answer the questions of what it means have the collective intentionality to "know the world"? Does the simple act of claiming that your community is attempting to kno...)
  • 01:42, 2 July 2017 Jacob MacKinnon talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0013 (That communities consist of sub-communities is an apt conclusion. I see no reason to reject the existence of sub-communities. The examples provided by Nicholas sufficiently demonstrate how one community can be a conglomeration of sub-communities. Verd...)
  • 20:55, 19 May 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0013 (There doesn't seem to be any reason for denying this. It seems almost trivial that a community can in principle consist of smaller communities. At the moment, the existence of these sub-communities doesn't strike me as problematic. I don't think we can...)
  • 20:48, 19 May 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (This is one of those unusual cases when a modification is ''de facto'' accepted even before its official publication. It is safe to say that the definitions of ''group'', ''accidental group'', and ''community'' suggested by Overgaard have been unoffici...)
  • 20:46, 19 May 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs deleted comment #39 on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012
  • 20:46, 19 May 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0012 (This is one of those typical cases where a modification is ''de facto'' accepted even before its publication. it is safe to say that the definitions of ''group'', ''accidental group'', and ''community'' suggested by Overgaard have been unofficially acc...)
  • 03:46, 16 February 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0002 (My verdict is also to '''accept''' the modification without qualms. Following the resolution of the paradox of normative propositions, there seems no good reason to exclude normative theories from the TSC, and many reasons why they should be included....)
  • 03:36, 16 February 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0004 (Modern science involves specialization and a division of labor. Thus instances where scientific communities will rely on the expertise of other scientific communities are all pervasive. The two definitions given here for one-sided and mutual authority...)
  • 17:10, 15 February 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0004 (I support acceptance of the modification. The reason for modifying the definition of employed method requires a bit more explanation than was given. In the new second law, a theory may be accepted into the mosaic if its assessment is inconclusive. The...)
  • 16:30, 15 February 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0001 (When the TSC was formulated, the status of normative propositions in the mosaic was unclear. Now that the paradox of normative propositions has been solved, a revised set of definitions was needed to accommodate normative propositions in the mosaic. 'T...)
  • 01:30, 2 February 2017 Nicholas Overgaard talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0002 (My verdict, too, is to accept this modification. We have an understanding of what Zoe means by "normative propositions", and I believe they certainly play a role in the process of scientific change. So why not adopt the belief that these normative prop...)
  • 01:25, 2 February 2017 Nicholas Overgaard talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0001 (I agree with Hakob here - if we're going to have any sort of conversation about whether or not any form of normative propositions exist in our scientonomic worldview, then we need to start from a definition. As is always the case, if we disagree later...)
  • 22:03, 1 February 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0003 (I agree with Paul that we need to accept the current definition to have something to work with, but we should also keep in mind that sometimes authority delegation seems to require an additional layer of filtering by the delegating community. Paul's ex...)
  • 18:02, 31 January 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0002 (After the solution of the paradox of normative propositions, I see no obstacles for including ''normative propositions'' into the mosaic. The paradox was the reason why normative propositions (such as those of...)
  • 17:59, 31 January 2017 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2017-0001 (These new definitions are an important addition to theoretical scientonomy. Since the paradox of normative propositions has been solved (see modification Sciento-2016-0001), we can now adjust our taxonomy to have a de...)
  • 21:23, 26 January 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs deleted comment #27 on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0003
  • 21:23, 26 January 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs deleted comment #28 on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0003
  • 21:22, 26 January 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0003 (My verdict is to accept the definition of authority delegation given, but I don’t accept all of the claims made for it in the paper. The concept of passive authority delegation as stated in the paper is clear, and may well be a valid one for describi...)
  • 19:57, 26 January 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0003 (Verdict: accept- the concept does work, and can be applied in some cases, such as the relationship between communities whose primary goal is epistemic and communities that have some other goal, for which knowledge is needed. But the concept of passive...)
  • 19:44, 26 January 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs deleted comment #26 on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0003
  • 19:44, 26 January 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0003 (The concept of authority delegation as stated in the paper is clear, and may well be a valid one for describing some relationships between communities, but I suspect that given its current definition its value will be very limited. The relationship tha...)
  • 17:37, 26 January 2017 Paul Patton talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2016-0003 (I'm not sure that the current definition captures the complex relationship between interacting scientific communities. Theoretical physicists clearly regard the results of experimental physicists as critically relevant to assessing their theories. Expe...)
(newest | oldest) View ( | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)
Retrieved from "https://www.scientowiki.com/Special:Log/comments"