Comments log
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This is a log of comments.
(newest | oldest) View (newer 20 | older 20) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)- 03:11, 17 September 2021 Tessa Ng talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2021-0005 (The suggested modification engages a meaningful concept in scientonomy, which is that of element decay. According to the First Law of scientific change, also known as the Law of Scientific Inertia, elements in a mosaic ought to remain present in a mosaic unless they are superseded by alternative elements. It goes without saying that as science has progressed, various elements have fallen out of mosaics without replacement due to a host of factors. This phenomenon, which is a direct violation...)
- 03:08, 17 September 2021 Tessa Ng talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0014 (The suggested modification, while interesting and potentially useful, seems to me too implausible to successfully implement due to the equivocality of the term “scientificity” throughout the history of science. It goes without saying that what qualifies as “scientific” has seldom been easily construed from culture to culture and era to era, hence the need for demarcation. However, although demarcation plays an integral role in scientonomy by distinguishing activities relevant to our practice,...)
- 00:03, 17 September 2021 Carlin Henikoff talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2021-0001 (I agree that the definitions of logical presupposition and epistemic presupposition should be accepted. The role of presupposition acceptance necessary to subsequent question acceptance -- as outlined by the law of question acceptance -- diverges from the notion of “supposition” central to the analysis of argument structures in logic. Whereas a question may only be accepted if all its epistemic presuppositions are accepted, an argument could very well be deemed logically valid without the ac...)
- 19:52, 8 September 2021 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2021-0004 (The historical cases discussed by Patton and Machado-Marques show convincingly that instances of scientific error handling are in full accord with ''the theory rejection theorem'', currently accepted in scientonomy. Specifically, they show that the rejection of an erroneously accepted theory is a result of the acceptance of other theories incompatible with it - be these some first- or second-order theories. I fully agree with their treatment of scientific error. My verdict: '''accept'''.)
- 19:45, 8 September 2021 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2021-0003 (Historians and philosophers customarily speak of scientific errors, yet the notion itself still has no accepted scientonomic definition. Building on the earlier unpublished essay by Mirkin and Karamehmetoglu, Patton and Machado-Marques suggest a definition of ''Error'' that fills in this gap. The definition, I believe, succeeds in capturing the gist of the notion by explicitly stating that an error is always relative to an epistemic agent and to that agent's employed method. As such, this not...)
- 18:38, 8 September 2021 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2021-0005 (Given the seemingly numerous historical cases of lost and rediscovered knowledge, it seems as though some accepted theories and questions sometimes stop being accepted without any deliberation on the agent's part. This is what the author calls ''element decay''. Therefore, it is important to inquire whether such a decay of theories and questions actually takes place in the process of scientific change. I believe, the author does an excellent job showing that locating actual instances of eleme...)
- 18:23, 8 September 2021 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2021-0006 (A scientonomic account of the notion of ''discipline'' was long overdue. The question of how the notion of ''discipline'' (and, consequently, ''discipline acceptance'' and ''discipline rejection'') can be cashed out in terms of more basic epistemic elements, such as theories and questions, has been raised several years ago. Yet, despite numerous discussions on the subject, this is the first published scientonomic paper to provide such an account. The paper suggests a number of definitions tha...)
- 15:04, 11 October 2020 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0014 (Following a series of discussions (mostly outside of this encyclopedia page), it seems that there are no objections to this modification. Thus, we can consider the matter settled.)
- 14:37, 11 October 2020 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0017 (Since the modification tries to fix an obvious drawback of my original definition, it is not surprising that it hasn't raised any objections. We can consider the matter settled.)
- 02:51, 12 June 2020 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0008 (This is the other modification that I am uncomfortable with, and my reasons here are quite similar to those I cited for rejecting 2019-0007. Let me raise another problem here, though: say we have a modification that gets accepted after rigorous debate, and everyone thinks that it is excellent. Now, after a few months, a new paper suggests a modification that proposes to replace the former. Assume that at this time the members of the scientonomic community are exceptionally busy and no one bot...)
- 02:43, 12 June 2020 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0007 (This is one of two modifications that I am most uncomfortable with. The point of science in my view is to unearth truth. Voting is an inappropriate way of doing so. As a practical matter, though, I can see that we need to stimulate discussion, have a way of deciding on what should be accepted, etc. So what I will say below addresses some of these worries. We need to keep in mind who votes and how many people vote. It was suggested in the paper that everyone gets the chance to vote. Though I...)
- 02:29, 12 June 2020 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0003 (Ameer raises an important question: should those who refer to a certain modification cite the modification's original paper, or the paper with commentaries on that modification, or both? As things stand, we don't have much choice but to cite the original paper and add a reference to the respective discussion page of the encyclopedia. However, if modification 2019-0002 is accepted and commentaries are published in separate papers, we will be able to also cite...)
- 02:28, 12 June 2020 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs deleted comment #150 on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0003
- 02:28, 12 June 2020 Hakob Barseghyan talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0003 (Ameer raises an important question: should those who refer to a certain modification cite the modification's original paper, or the paper with commentaries on that modification, or both? As things stand, we don't have much choice but to cite the original paper and a a reference to the respective discussion page of the encyclopedia. However, if modification 2019-0002 is accepted and commentaries are published in separate papers, we will be able to also cite t...)
- 02:26, 12 June 2020 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0006 (This sounds pretty reasonable to me. I suggest accepting this modification.)
- 02:25, 12 June 2020 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0005 (We should accept this modification, though this should not come at the expense of modification 2019-0002.)
- 02:23, 12 June 2020 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0004 (I am not sure what a "book prize" is. This sounds like a prize for writing a book, but that is not what is intended here. I recommend changing the name to something that more closely resembles what the prize is for. I am witholding judgment on this modification until further discussion. Also, and this is a completely separate suggestion, it may be useful if everyone who has an account on the Encyclopedia received a monthly email that talked about the new comments made to the modifications, e...)
- 02:16, 12 June 2020 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0003 (I have some questions about this. Say person X proposes a modification and person Y proposes a change to it that everyone agrees should be made. X may then give credit to Y, and so the latter's name also appears on the modification. Yet, when other scholars write papers that utilize this modification, what should do they cite? Should they cite the original paper? Alternatively, if modification 2019-0002 is accepted, do they cite the co-authored paper (published in either the journal or an edi...)
- 02:11, 12 June 2020 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0002 (I think this definitely provides a much needed incentive. I think it is better if the work is published in edited collections than in the scientonomy journal. There are two reasons for this preference: (1) Edited collections broaden the audience of the scientonomic work. People who do not read ordinary scientonomy journal are unlikely to read a commentary on specific modifications in that journal. Rather, having edited collections, which I presume will be published by external publishers, inc...)
- 02:03, 12 June 2020 Ameer Sarwar talk contribs posted a new comment on Modification talk:Sciento-2019-0001 (This seems like a perfectly fine suggestion. After all, if the acceptance of an idea (modification) depends on the discussion in these comments and communal consensus, then asking the reviewers to evaluate papers on whether they are acceptable (in the technical sense) seems besides the point. Hence, I suggest accepting this modificaiton.)
