Property:Acceptance Indicators
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This is a property of type text.
A
Associations of Local Epistemic Action became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Local Epistemic Action]]. This is when [[Local Epistemic Action (Allen-2023)|the first definition of the term]] was suggested, indicating that the term itself is accepted. +
Associations of Logical Presupposition became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Logical Presupposition]]. This is when Barseghyan and Levesley's [[Barseghyan and Levesley (2021)|''Question Dynamics'']] that offered a definition of the term was published. This is a good indication that the question of how the term is to be defined is considered legitimate by the community. +
Associations of Method Hierarchy became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Method Hierarchy]]. The question became accepted with the publication of [[Mercuri and Barseghyan (2019)|the paper]] by Mercuri & Barseghyan. +
Associations of Method became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Method]]. That's when the first scientonomic definition of the term, [[Method (Barseghyan-2015)]], became accepted, which is a indication that the topic itself is considered legitimate. +
Associations of Model became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Model]]. This question was acknowledged as legitimate in the [[Scientonomy Seminar 2016]]. +
Associations of Mosaic Merge became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Mosaic Merge]]. +
Associations of Mosaic Split became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Mosaic Split]]. +
Associations of Norm Employment became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Norm Employment]]. The question became accepted as a result of the [[Modification:Sciento-2018-0008|acceptance]] of [[Norm Employment (Barseghyan-2018)|the first definition of the term]]. +
Associations of Normative Theory became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Normative Theory]]. It was acknowledged as an open question by the [[Scientonomy Seminar 2015]]. +
Associations of Question Acceptance became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Question Acceptance]]. This is when Rawleigh's [[Rawleigh (2018)|The Status of Questions in the Ontology of Scientific Change]] that offered a definition of ''question acceptance'' was published. This is a good indication that the question of how the term is to be defined is considered legitimate by the community. +
Associations of Question became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Question]]. This is when Rawleigh's [[Rawleigh (2018)|The Status of Questions in the Ontology of Scientific Change]] that offered a definition of ''question'' was published. This is a good indication that the question of how ''question'' is to be defined is considered legitimate by the community. +
Associations of Scientific Mosaic became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Scientific Mosaic]]. This is when the community accepted its first definition of the term, [[Scientific Mosaic (2015)]], which indicates that the question is itself considered legitimate. +
Associations of Subdiscipline became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Subdiscipline]]. This is when Patton and Al-Zayadi's [[Patton and Al-Zayadi (2021)|''Disciplines in the Scientonomic Ontology'']] that offered a definition of the term was published. This is a good indication that the question of how the term is to be defined is considered legitimate by the community. +
Associations of Subquestion became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Subquestion]]. This is when Patton and Al-Zayadi's [[Patton and Al-Zayadi (2021)|''Disciplines in the Scientonomic Ontology'']] hat offered a definition of the term was published. This is a good indication that the question of how the term is to be defined is considered legitimate by the community. +
Associations of Theory Acceptance became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Theory Acceptance]]. This is when the community accepted its first definition of the term, [[Theory Acceptance (Barseghyan-2015)]], which indicates that the term itself became accepted. +
Associations of Theory Pursuit became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Theory Pursuit]]. +
Associations of Theory Use became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Theory Use]]. +
Associations of Theory became accepted by virtue of the acceptance of [[Theory]]. The term became accepted together with the rest of the original TSC. +
The theorem became de facto accepted by the community at that time together with the whole theory of scientific change. +
The definition became accepted as a result of the acceptance of the respective [[Modification:Sciento-2016-0003|suggested modification]]. +
