Accept compatibility as a distinct epistemic stance that can be taken towards epistemic elements of all types. Also accept that compatibility is binary, reflexive, and symmetric. Transitivity of compatibility holds only within mosaics, not sui generis.
Compatibility is a distinct epistemic stance that agents can take towards epistemic elements. It is distinct because it is possible to show that an agent can take this stance without necessarily taking others, such as acceptance. Although all elements of the mosaic are compatible in principle, there may be unaccepted theories that are either compatible or incompatible with elements in the mosaic. Compatibility is therefore distinct from acceptance, because epistemic agents can evaluate the compatibility of unaccepted theories with one another or with accepted theories.
Compatibility is also distinct from use, because epistemic agents are perfectly capable of using or failing to use theories regardless of their mutually compatibility. Quantum mechanics is both used and accepted by the contemporary scientific community, as is evolutionary theory. Although quantum theory and evolution are compatible members of the same mosaic, it is nonetheless the case that evolutionary theory, unlike quantum mechanics has few practical applications and remains largely unused.
Pursuit and compatibility are also distinct stances, since epistemic agents may pursue theories that are either compatible or incompatible with one another and with elements of the mosaic.
Accept compatibility as a distinct epistemic stance that can be taken towards epistemic elements of all types.
Also accept that compatibility is binary, reflexive, and symmetric. Transitivity of compatibility holds only within mosaics, not sui generis.
The modification is currently being evaluated; a verdict is pending.
Click on the Discussion tab for comments.
- Fraser, Patrick and Sarwar, Ameer. (2018) A Compatibility Law and the Classification of Theory Change. Scientonomy 2, 67-82. Retrieved from https://scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/31278.