Difference between revisions of "The Paradox of Normative Propositions"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "{{Descriptive Topic |Question=If methodologies are themselves theories that can be accepted by a community, then how can methods be deductive consequences of accepted theories...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Descriptive Topic | {{Descriptive Topic | ||
|Question=If methodologies are themselves theories that can be accepted by a community, then how can methods be deductive consequences of accepted theories, given that historically employed methods and accepted methodologies have often been inconsistent with one another? | |Question=If methodologies are themselves theories that can be accepted by a community, then how can methods be deductive consequences of accepted theories, given that historically employed methods and accepted methodologies have often been inconsistent with one another? | ||
| + | |Parent Topic=Mechanism of Scientific Change | ||
|Formulated Year=2013 | |Formulated Year=2013 | ||
|Description=There are many historical cases where employed [[Method|scientific methods]] are known to conflict with professed methodologies. This seems to violate either [[The Third Law (Barseghyan-2015)|the third law]] or [[The Zeroth Law (Harder-2015)|the zeroth law]] of scientific change. By the third law, employed methods are always deductive consequences of accepted theories. But, this seems impossible in cases where accepted methodologies and employed methods conflict. Under the zeroth law, all elements in the scientific mosaic are compatible with one another. But, that seems to be clearly not the case if methodologies and methods conflict with one another. How can this paradox be resolved? | |Description=There are many historical cases where employed [[Method|scientific methods]] are known to conflict with professed methodologies. This seems to violate either [[The Third Law (Barseghyan-2015)|the third law]] or [[The Zeroth Law (Harder-2015)|the zeroth law]] of scientific change. By the third law, employed methods are always deductive consequences of accepted theories. But, this seems impossible in cases where accepted methodologies and employed methods conflict. Under the zeroth law, all elements in the scientific mosaic are compatible with one another. But, that seems to be clearly not the case if methodologies and methods conflict with one another. How can this paradox be resolved? | ||
Revision as of 02:18, 30 August 2016
References
- a b c d Barseghyan, Hakob. (2015) The Laws of Scientific Change. Springer.
- ^ Burkholder, Joel. (2014) Protomethod, The Third Law, and Ethical Propositions. Unpublished manuscript.
- a b c Sebastien, Zoe. (2016) The Status of Normative Propositions in the Theory of Scientific Change. Scientonomy 1, 1-9. Retrieved from https://www.scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/26947.
