Test

Hello world

Theory
Scientonomy (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Community Is a Subtype of Epistemic Agent (Barseghyan-2018) Individual Epistemic Agent Is a Subtype of Epistemic Agent (Patton-2019)
Explicit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Mirkin-2018) Implicit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Mirkin-2018) Question Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Rawleigh-2018) Theory Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Barseghyan-2015)
Compatibility Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Fraser-Sarwar-2018) Norm Employment Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2018) Question Acceptance Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Rawleigh-2018) Theory Acceptance Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2015) Theory Pursuit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2015) Theory Use Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2015)
The First Law (Barseghyan-2015)
The First Law for Theories (Barseghyan-2015)
The First Law for Methods (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Stances Towards Epistemic Elements - Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)
The Law of Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Method Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Methodology Can Shape Method theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Explicit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Mirkin-2018)
Substantive Method (Barseghyan-2015)
The Second Law (Barseghyan-2015) is Tautological (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Community Exists
Demarcation Criteria (Barseghyan-2015)
Theory Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Barseghyan-2015)
Scope of Scientonomy - All Fields (Barseghyan-2015) Scope of Scientonomy - All Scales (Barseghyan-2015) Scope of Scientonomy - All Time Periods (Barseghyan-2015)
Logical Presupposition (Barseghyan-Levesley-2021)
Acceptance Criteria (Barseghyan-2015)
Norm Employment Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2018)
Possibility of Scientonomy (Barseghyan-2015)
Outcome Inconclusive (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
Handling Ripple Effects - Editorial House Keeping (Shaw-Barseghyan-2019)
Indicators of Theory Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015)
Question Can Presuppose Theories (Barseghyan-Levesley-2019) Theory Answers Question (Rawleigh-2018)
Necessary Method theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Question Acceptance Exists
Group (Overgaard-2017)
The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017) is Not Tautological (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
Mutual Authority Delegation (Patton-2019)
Theory Acceptance (Barseghyan-2018)
Definition Is a Subtype of Theory (Barseghyan-2018)
Necessary Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Possible Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Split Due to Inconclusiveness theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
One-sided Authority Delegation (Patton-2019)
Community (Overgaard-2017)
Implicit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Mirkin-2018)
Epistemic Stances Towards Questions - Question Acceptance (Rawleigh-2018)
Scientific Underdeterminism theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Underdetermined Method Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Underdetermined Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Community Can Delegate Authority to Another Community (Loiselle-Overgaard-2016)
Epistemic Agent (Patton-2019)
Scope of Scientonomy - Social (Barseghyan-2015)
Question Exists
Inexplicable (Mirkin-Barseghyan-2018)
Logical Presupposition Exists
Response to the Argument from Changeability of Scientific Method (Barseghyan-2015)
Social Level (Barseghyan-2015)
Normative Theory (Sebastien-2016)
Descriptive Theory Exists
Synchronism of Method Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Procedural Method (Barseghyan-2015)
Pursuit as Distinct from Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Agent Exists
Asynchronism of Method Employment theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Theory Acceptance Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2015)
Scientific Change (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Pursuit (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Use (Barseghyan-2015)
The Law of Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018) is Not Tautological (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Explicit (Mirkin-Barseghyan-2018)
Error (Machado-Marques-Patton-2021)
Compatibility Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Indicators of Method Employment (Barseghyan-2015)
Multiple Authority Delegation (Patton-2019)
Definition (Barseghyan-2018)
Theory Use Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2015)
Mosaic Merge (Barseghyan-2015)
Goals of Peer Review - Pursuitworthiness (Shaw-Barseghyan-2019)
Scope of Scientonomy - Implicit and Explicit (Barseghyan-2017)
Normative Theory Exists
Error Rejection by Replacement (Machado-Marques-Patton-2021)
Theory Pursuit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2015)
Question Acceptance (Rawleigh-2018)
Epistemic Community Is a Subtype of Epistemic Agent (Barseghyan-2018)
Theory Assessment Outcomes (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
Compatibility Criteria (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Method (Barseghyan-2018)
Question Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Rawleigh-2018)
Scope of Scientonomy - Descriptive (Barseghyan-2015)
Hierarchical Authority Delegation (Patton-2019)
Theory Acceptance Exists
Response to the Argument from Bad Track Record (Barseghyan-2015)
Definition Exists
Epistemic Presupposition (Barseghyan-Levesley-2021)
Compatibility Corollary (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Explicable-Implicit (Mirkin-Barseghyan-2018)
Accidental Group (Overgaard-2017)
Descriptive Theory Is a Subtype of Theory (Barseghyan-2015)
Response to the Argument from Nothing Permanent (Barseghyan-2015)
History of Scientific Change (Barseghyan-2015)
Descriptive Theory (Sebastien-2016)
Normative Theory Is a Subtype of Theory (Sebastien-2016)
Implicit (Mirkin-Barseghyan-2018)
Publishing Modification Comments (Shaw-Barseghyan-2019)
Response to the Argument from Social Construction (Barseghyan-2015)
Question Acceptance Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Rawleigh-2018)
Technological Knowledge as Part of Mosaic (Mirkin-2018)
Method Is a Subtype of Normative Theory (Barseghyan-2018)
Singular Authority Delegation (Patton-2019)
Definition Is a Subtype of Theory (Barseghyan-2018) Descriptive Theory Is a Subtype of Theory (Barseghyan-2015) Normative Theory Is a Subtype of Theory (Sebastien-2016)
Assessment of Scientonomy - Relevant Facts (Barseghyan-2015)
Mosaic Split (Barseghyan-2015)
Authority Delegation (Patton-2019)
Theory Exists
The Zeroth Law (Harder-2015) is Tautological (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Outcome Not Satisfied (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
Community Exists
Epistemic Stances Towards Normative Theories - Norm Employment (Barseghyan-2018)
Scientonomic Workflow (Barseghyan et al.-2016)
Epistemic Presupposition Exists
Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Theory Pursuit (Barseghyan-2015)
Outcome Satisfied (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
Individual Epistemic Agent Exists
Scope of Scientonomy - Appraisal (Barseghyan-2015)
Scientific Mosaic (Barseghyan-2018)
Question (Rawleigh-2018)
Epistemic Stance Exists
Norm Employment (Barseghyan-2018)
Allow Modification Reformulations (Shaw-Barseghyan-2019)
Sociocultural Factors in Theory Acceptance theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Individual Epistemic Agent Is a Subtype of Epistemic Agent (Patton-2019)
Scope of Scientonomy - Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Element Exists
Theory Use (Barseghyan-2015)
Resolution to the Paradox of Normative Propositions (Sebastien-2016)
Methodology (Barseghyan-2018)
Individual Level (Barseghyan-2015)
Question Can Presuppose Theories (Barseghyan-Levesley-2019) Theory Answers Question (Rawleigh-2018)
Dogmatism No Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Non-Hierarchical Authority Delegation (Patton-2019)
Theory (Sebastien-2016)
Method Is a Subtype of Normative Theory (Barseghyan-2018)
The First Law (Barseghyan-2015)
The First Law (Barseghyan-2015)
The First Law (Barseghyan-2015)
The First Law for Theories (Barseghyan-2015)
The First Law for Theories (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Stances Towards Epistemic Elements - Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Epistemic Stances Towards Epistemic Elements - Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Epistemic Stances Towards Epistemic Elements - Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Epistemic Stances Towards Epistemic Elements - Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
Epistemic Stances Towards Epistemic Elements - Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Epistemic Stances Towards Epistemic Elements - Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
Epistemic Stances Towards Epistemic Elements - Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)
The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)
The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)
The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)
The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)
The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)
The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)
The Law of Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
The Law of Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Method Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Method Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Possibility of Scientonomy (Barseghyan-2015)
Possibility of Scientonomy (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Pursuit (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Use (Barseghyan-2015)
Scientonomic Workflow (Barseghyan et al.-2016)
Scope of Scientonomy - Implicit and Explicit (Barseghyan-2017)
Scientonomic Workflow (Barseghyan et al.-2016)
Possibility of Scientonomy (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Pursuit (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Use (Barseghyan-2015)
Necessary Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Possible Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Split Due to Inconclusiveness theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Theory Assessment Outcomes (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
Scientonomic Workflow (Barseghyan et al.-2016)
Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Pursuit (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Use (Barseghyan-2015)
Scientonomic Workflow (Barseghyan et al.-2016)
Possibility of Scientonomy (Barseghyan-2015)
Scientonomic Workflow (Barseghyan et al.-2016)
Necessary Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Possible Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Split Due to Inconclusiveness theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Stances Towards Normative Theories - Norm Employment (Barseghyan-2018)
Possibility of Scientonomy (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Pursuit (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Use (Barseghyan-2015)
Assessment of Scientonomy - Relevant Facts (Barseghyan-2015)
Technological Knowledge as Part of Mosaic (Mirkin-2018)
Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Pursuit (Barseghyan-2015) Epistemic Stances Towards Theories - Theory Use (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Community Is a Subtype of Epistemic Agent (Barseghyan-2018) Individual Epistemic Agent Is a Subtype of Epistemic Agent (Patton-2019)
Question Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Rawleigh-2018) Theory Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Barseghyan-2015) Explicit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Mirkin-2018) Implicit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Element (Mirkin-2018)
Theory Acceptance Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2015) Norm Employment Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2018) Question Acceptance Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Rawleigh-2018) Compatibility Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Fraser-Sarwar-2018) Theory Use Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2015) Theory Pursuit Is a Subtype of Epistemic Stance (Barseghyan-2015)
The First Law (Barseghyan-2015)
The First Law for Methods (Barseghyan-2015)
Epistemic Stances Towards Epistemic Elements - Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
The Second Law (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)
The Third Law (Sebastien-2016)
The Law of Compatibility (Fraser-Sarwar-2018)
Theory Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Method Rejection theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Scope of Scientonomy - Appraisal (Barseghyan-2015)
Sociocultural Factors in Theory Acceptance theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Scope of Scientonomy - Implicit and Explicit (Barseghyan-2017)
Sociocultural Factors in Theory Acceptance theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Scope of Scientonomy - Descriptive (Barseghyan-2015)
Necessary Method theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Scope of Scientonomy - Social (Barseghyan-2015)
Theory Assessment Outcomes (Patton-Overgaard-Barseghyan-2017)
Scope of Scientonomy - All Fields (Barseghyan-2015) Scope of Scientonomy - All Scales (Barseghyan-2015) Scope of Scientonomy - All Time Periods (Barseghyan-2015)
Underdetermined Method Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Underdetermined Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Scientific Underdeterminism theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Dogmatism No Theory Change theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Necessary Method theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Assessment of Scientonomy - Relevant Facts (Barseghyan-2015)
Necessary Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Possible Mosaic Split theorem (Barseghyan-2015) Split Due to Inconclusiveness theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Necessary Method theorem (Barseghyan-2015)
Scope of Scientonomy - Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015)
Methodology Can Shape Method theorem (Barseghyan-2015)

In Scientonomy, the accepted definition of the term is Scientonomy (Barseghyan-2015). It is defined as: "A descriptive discipline that attempts to uncover the actual general mechanism of scientific change."

Welcome to the Encyclopedia of Scientonomy

the clearing house for the scientonomic knowledge on the process of scientific change that aims at

• outlining the current state of our communal knowledge of the mechanism of scientific change;
• tracing all suggested modifications to our communal knowledge;
• documenting the open questions concerning the process of scientific change.

There are currently 3,552 pages in this encyclopedia.

Featured Article Scope of Scientonomy - Descriptive and Normative Ought a scientonomic theory be descriptive or normative? In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by Hakob Barseghyan in 2015. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community. Scope of Scientonomy - Descriptive (Barseghyan-2015) is currently accepted by Scientonomy community as the best available answer to the question. At the moment, the question has no accepted answer in Scientonomy. Read More In the news 25 February 2023: Modification Sciento-2019-0007 was accepted. Prior to the 2023 workshop, Ameer Sarwar argued against the modification. First, he noted that voting is not an appropriate mechanism in science where the goal is to unearth truth.c1 Second, it is unclear how we can ensure informed voting given that some members of the community could be inactive for several years. He thus suggested that we should keep this modification open and wait until after the resolution of modifications 2019-0002 and 2019-0003 that suggest alternative ways to increase participation. During the workshop, the modification was generally well received. Before voting, there was some concern about our voting process – who can vote and when can they vote? – voiced by Josh Allen and Paul Patton. Additionally, Deivide Garcia and Amirali Atrli raised concerns about who are “allowed” to function as part of the scientonomy community. Patton also suggested introducing quorum in addition to the 2/3rds stipulation to avoid potential modifications to the scientonomic body of knowledge introduced by a small number of participants. Gregory Rupik along with Jamie Shaw indicated that while quorum makes perfect sense for larger decision-making bodies, our capacity to vote should not hinge on who is absent, but rather on who is present. It was also determined that even though there is always a risk of a small group of people making big changes, or with people being unsatisfied with a modification they were not allowed to vote on, the iterative nature of our process ensures that there are easy solutions here; in addition, as Spenser summarized, most people in academic environments can be trusted to self-police. Rupik also highlighted the need to formalize the acceptance mechanism in the encyclopedia explicitly: i.e. without 3 comments with unanimity, the modification will be discussed at a workshop, and it is possible that it will remain open after the workshop, in which case we will wait until the next workshop to further discuss and modify it. Notably, since this proposal represents an attempt to formalize a voting system and closure mechanism, and itself was not subject to a specific voting system, it was decided by those present that we would accept this modification with a minimum of 2/3rds assent. The modification was accepted with overwhelming support. Read More 25 February 2023: Modification Sciento-2019-0006 was accepted. The decision was made during the 2023 workshop. Hakob Barseghyan emphasized that this modification does not grant permission to alter the body of scientonomic knowledge but simply to ensure that the pages of the encyclopedia reflect the actual state of scientonomic knowledge and that the scientonomic knowledge is stored in the most appropriate manner. Among other things, this is to handle the so-called ripple effect. Barseghyan mentioned that, while working on the encyclopedia with Paul Patton and Izzy Friesen, they had discovered several instances of ripple effect that resulted from our human lack of omniscience (e.g. a theory was supposed to be listed under Theories to Accept of a modification but wasn’t; a theory was actually accepted by the community but there was no record of it in the encyclopedia, etc.). Hence, according to Barseghyan, it would make sense to grant the editors the necessary right to adjust the respective pages to handle its consequences. Deivide Garcia wondered how such very small modifications can be tracked. Barseghyan responded that the changes in question are not meant to concern the body of scientonomic knowledge (thus, these are not modifications in the standard scientonomic sense), but are only to ensure that the encyclopedia reflects the current state of scientonomic knowledge and organizes that knowledge efficiently. Kye Palider highlighted the issue of transparency: how will the community be notified about such changes? Barseghyan suggested that an annual housekeeping paper is to be published in the Scientonomy journal as a collective report on changes to the encyclopedia. The modification was accepted. Read More 25 February 2023: Modification Sciento-2019-0005 was not accepted. At the 2023 workshop, this modification was met with concerns from the community. Firstly, the question of the equitability of star ratings was highlighted by Rebecca Muscant and Izzy Friesen. Amirali Atrli also wondered whether the problem of incentives becomes further stretched out by the five-star scale. Kye Palider noted that the up-or-down arrow that we already have on our Wiki seems simpler and more democratic than star-ranking. Alessandra Castino also mentioned that on online forums, the basis of their rating systems can discourage new commenters, and that we might see this here too. Some rating systems are also better than others – it was suggested by Joshua Allen, for example, that StackExchange’s system could provide a good model, as it incentivizes participation. Friesen highlighted that larger forums where rating systems for commentary are popular include anonymity by default, which makes this kind of recognition important, but this is not so much of an issue in the scientonomy community. Palider suggested simply listing a user’s number of comments but, as Castino emphasized, such ratings might not reflect the quality of the comments. Jamie Shaw noted that this need not necessarily be an issue since all participation grades are almost inevitably subjective and don’t necessarily reflect the quality. Deivide Garcia suggested that more thoughts needs to be put into this before any of the suggestions could be implemented. Barseghyan agreed and noted that the mediawiki platform has limitations on what can be done here, so it is unclear which of the new suggestions could be possibly implemented. Ultimately, though, the modification was rejected. Read More

Recent Suggested Modifications (all) Sciento-2024-0003: Open Sanghoon Oh Accept that element decay is a non-scientonomic phenomenon. The modification is currently being evaluated; a verdict is pending. Read More Sciento-2024-0002: Open Sanghoon Oh Accept a list of necessary indicators of theory decay. The modification is currently being evaluated; a verdict is pending. Read More Sciento-2024-0001: Open Sanghoon Oh Accept that the phenomenon of element decay exists. The modification is currently being evaluated; a verdict is pending. Read More Recent Publications (check out the journal) Discipline Dynamics of Chymistry and Rejection of Alchemy Paul Patton and Izzy Friesen Abstract: This paper applies Patton and Al-Zayadi’s scientonomic framework for understanding disciplines to a case study of the development of the chemical discipline ("chymistry") from the 17th century through the early 18th century in Western Europe. Using evidence from the tradition of textbook publication that emerged in the seventeenth-century chymistry, we reconstruct the top-level of the question hierarchy of chymistry. Analyzing how these questions and their associated theories were received, we first show how, starting in the 1660s, alchemy transitioned from a synonym of chymistry to chymistry’s subdiscipline with a more limited scope. We identify that the rejection of alchemy's core questions occurred in the 1720s based on the reception of these questions in scientific publications and by academic institutions. Hence, we conclude that the subdiscipline of alchemy became rejected in the 1720s. In order to conduct our case-study, we closely follow Newman and Principe's research on early modern alchemy and chymistry in our reconstruction of the episode. However, using the scientonomic framework in analyzing this case study reveals the specific dynamics of this instance of sub-discipline rejection. Our deepened understanding of this hallmark historical episode of disciplinary rejection indicates the value of Patton and Al-Zayadi’s theoretical framework for observational scientonomic research. Read More Epistemic Actions: A Scientonomic Framework Joshua Allen Abstract: In a series of publications, Hasok Chang makes the case that activities carried out by epistemic agents form the basis of the scientific enterprise. This paper provides an action-based scientonomic perspective of scientific practice. I define epistemic action as an action of an epistemic agent that involves an epistemic element and highlight the difference between global and local actions. The availability of a local action to an epistemic agent amounts to the agent employing the norm that the local action is permissible/desirable. To unearth the mechanism by which local actions become available to epistemic agents, I derive the local action availability theorem, according to which, a local epistemic action becomes available to an agent only when its permissibility is derivable from a non-empty subset of other elements of the agent’s mosaic, i.e., from that agent’s employed norms and accepted theories. This framework is then applied to the emergence of the local action of determining the composition of chemical substances by weighing as practiced by Lavoisier and his followers; it is shown that the respective norm became employed in accord with the local action availability theorem. Read More Corpus Linguistics Strategies for Identifying Accepted Theories in Early Modern England G. G. Shan Abstract: The paper investigates the applicability of corpus linguistics to the construction of a database of intellectual history. Working with the Royal Society Corpus (RSC), it presents a series of corpus queries that can aid with computationally identifying potential instances of communal theory acceptance in England during the period of 1665-1800. These queries allowed to identify a set of noun-adjective pairs potentially synonymous with “accepted theory” and retrieve around 1,400 excerpts potentially indicative of instances of communal theory acceptance. The paper also discusses some strategies for identifying the epistemic agent, as well as the RSC’s place within the broader historical context. Finally, I argue that, in addition to exploring corpus linguistics strategies, methodologies for interpreting computationally retrieved data should also be developed. Read More

From today's featured list Some text