Modification talk:Sciento-2018-0009

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to: navigation, search

Provide your comments regarding the suggested modification here. At minimum you need to indicate whether you think the modification is acceptable, why "yes" or why "no". The key question here is not whether the modification is flawless - no modification ever is. The key question is whether the modification, if accepted, will provide an overall improvement to our communal knowledge.

Please follow the instructions in the guidelines for readers.

Paul Patton

12 months ago
Score 0
While I support the eventual acceptance of this definition, I believe it is not acceptable at present, because it contains a term; 'epistemic agent', which has not yet been defined within scientonomy. I will be proposing a definition of 'epistemic agent' in association with a paper currently under review. If this definition, or some other satisfactory definition of 'epistemic agent' is accepted by the community, then I believe that this definition of 'Scientific Mosaic' is otherwise suitable for acceptance. It rectifies some important flaws in the earlier definition of 'Scientific Mosaic'.

Hakob Barseghyan

5 months ago
Score 0
While I agree that a proper definition of epistemic agent is to be actively pursued, I don't think that a lack of such definition is to be taken as a reason for postponing the acceptance of the definition of scientific mosaic. After all, it is inevitable in any system of definition to have term which rely in their definitions on other (yet) undefined terms. No matter how complex the system of definitions is, it must eventually use some undefined terms, unless of course it uses fundamental terms that are cross-defined, i.e. where x is used to define y, while y is used to define x. So I do not find it advisable to consider the absence of a certain definition as an obstacle for accepting some other definition.

Paul Patton

14 days ago
Score 0
Since I wrote my original comment, I have proposed a definition of epistemic agent, which is now under consideration for acceptance. I think we do have sufficient general understanding of what an epistemic agent is to accept this definition of the scientific mosaic, even without first accepting a definition of epistemic agent. That being the case, I drop my objection and support the acceptance of this definition.

You are not allowed to post comments.