Tautological Status of The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015)

Is Barseghyan's original second law a tautology?

As any law, Barseghyan's original second law attempts to forbid certain courses of action, for otherwise it would lack any empirical content and would be a tautology. Thus, the question is whether Barseghyan's original second law is tautological or non-tautological, i.e. whether there are any conceivable courses of events under which the second law can in principle be violated.

In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by Rory Harder in 2013. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community.

In Scientonomy, the accepted answer to the question is:

• Barseghyan's original second law is tautological.

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):

Community	Accepted From	Acceptance Indicators	Still Accepted	Accepted Until	Rejection Indicators
Scientonomy	1 January 2016	The question became accepted with the acceptance of the original theory of scientific change.	Yes

All Theories

The following theories have attempted to answer this question:

Theory	Formulation	Formulated In
The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015)	Barseghyan's original second law is tautological.	2015

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

Accepted Theories

The following theories have been accepted as answers to this question:

Community	Theory	Accepted From	Accepted Until
Scientonomy	The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015)	1 January 2016

Suggested Modifications

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

Current View

In Scientonomy, the accepted answer to the question is The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015).

The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015) states: "Barseghyan's original second law is tautological."

According to Barseghyan's initial position, "the second law is not a law in the traditional sense, for normally a law is supposed to have some empirical content, i.e. its opposite should be conceivable at least in principle. Obviously, the second law is a tautology, since it follows from the definition of employed method".1p. 129, footnote