Nature of Appraisal

What is the nature of theory appraisal? Does actual theory assessment concern an individual theory taken in isolation from other theories?

Theory appraisal refers to how we assess a theory to determine whether to accept it. From ancient times up until the mid-twentieth century, it was widely supposed that theories were appraised in isolation from one another; a position known as absolute appraisal. Once fallibilism became widely accepted, it was suggested instead that theory appraisal is a comparative matter, in which the relative merits of competing theories were assessed. Contextual appraisal contends that a theory is assessed only in relation to the entire mosaic of accepted theories and employed methods. For the historian, several elements must be considered in order to avoid committing anachronisms.

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. There is currently no accepted answer to this question in Scientonomy.

Broader History

Concepts pre-dating the current appreciation of contextual appraisal include epistemological concerns about the absolute appraisal of individual theories based on their available data. Early rationalist and empiricist philosophers believed in what has been called the justificationist interpretation of absolute appraisal which states that there could be decisive proofs and refutations of individual theories. Later, probabilist interpretations were proposed stating that one cannot decisively prove a theory, but merely objectively measure its probability relative to the available evidence. This probabilistic tradition has been common amongst philosophers of science at both Cambridge and Vienna. Both interpretations of absolute appraisal share the opinion that theory assessment concerns an individual theory taken in isolation from other theories. In contrast, the comparative interpretation states that theory assessment does not concern individual theories considered in isolation. The epistemological consensus of fallibilism, that no empirical belief can ever be rationally supported or justified in a conclusive way, resulted in a shift towards the comparative interpretations of theory appraisal. An epistemological concern of whether a theory is the best available required there to be extant competitors to appraise relative merit through comparative appraisal. Among many others, comparative appraisal can be noted in the work of philosophers of science such as Karl Popper, Thomas Kuhn, Imre Lakatos, and Larry Laudan. The traditional comparative procedure of theory appraisal only accounts for two competing theories, some method of assessment, and some relative evidence. What the traditional version of comparativism does not take into account is that all theory assessment takes place within a specific historical context.

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	That is when the community accepted its first answer to this question, Contextual Appraisal theorem (Barseghyan-2015), which indicates that the question is itself considered legitimate.	Yes

All Theories

The following direct answers to the question have been suggested:

Theory	Formulation	Formulated In
Contextual Appraisal theorem (Barseghyan-2015)	Theory assessment is an assessment of a proposed modification of the mosaic by the method employed at the time.	2015

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

Accepted Theories

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

Community	Theory	Accepted From	Accepted Until
Scientonomy	Contextual Appraisal theorem (Barseghyan-2015)	1 January 2016

Suggested Modifications

There have been no suggested modifications concerning direct answers to this question.

Current View

At the moment, the question has no accepted answer in Scientonomy.

Related Topics

This question is a subquestion of Mechanism of Theory Acceptance.