Difference between revisions of "Assessment of Scientonomy - Method"
Paul Patton (talk | contribs) |
Paul Patton (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Question=What method ought to be employed to assess a scientonomic theory? | |Question=What method ought to be employed to assess a scientonomic theory? | ||
|Topic Type=Normative | |Topic Type=Normative | ||
| − | |Description=[[Theory|Theories]] are assessed by a [[community]] and will be accepted into the [[Scientific Mosaic|mosaic]] of that community [[Employed Method|if they satisfy the employed method of the time]]. Like any other theory, a scientonomic theory will be assessed by the [[Scientonomy|scientonomic community]] itself. What method should the scientonomic community use to assess a scientonomic theory? | + | |Description=[[Theory|Theories]] are assessed by a [[community]] and will be accepted into the [[Scientific Mosaic|mosaic]] of that community [[Employed Method|if they satisfy the employed method of the time]]. Like any other theory, a scientonomic theory will be assessed by the [[Scientonomy|scientonomic community]] itself. What method should the scientonomic community use to assess a scientonomic theory? While it seems clear that a theory of scientific change must account for the process of scientific change and the transitions from one accepted theory to another and one employed method to another, [[CiteRef:: Barseghyan (2015) | p. 107]] it is not clear what methodology should act as a normative guide for such an assessment. |
|Parent Topic=Assessment of Scientonomy | |Parent Topic=Assessment of Scientonomy | ||
|Authors List=Hakob Barseghyan, | |Authors List=Hakob Barseghyan, | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
|Accepted From Day=1 | |Accepted From Day=1 | ||
|Accepted From Approximate=No | |Accepted From Approximate=No | ||
| − | |Acceptance Indicators= | + | |Acceptance Indicators=The question was raised by Barseghyan in his original formulation of scientonomy [[CiteRef::Barseghyan (2015) |pp. 99-109]], although he was unable to supply a normative answer. |
|Still Accepted=Yes | |Still Accepted=Yes | ||
|Accepted Until Approximate=No | |Accepted Until Approximate=No | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 01:41, 23 July 2017
What method ought to be employed to assess a scientonomic theory?
Theories are assessed by a community and will be accepted into the mosaic of that community if they satisfy the employed method of the time. Like any other theory, a scientonomic theory will be assessed by the scientonomic community itself. What method should the scientonomic community use to assess a scientonomic theory? While it seems clear that a theory of scientific change must account for the process of scientific change and the transitions from one accepted theory to another and one employed method to another, 1p. 107 it is not clear what methodology should act as a normative guide for such an assessment.
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.
Contents
Scientonomic History
Acceptance Record
| Community | Accepted From | Acceptance Indicators | Still Accepted | Accepted Until | Rejection Indicators |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scientonomy | 1 January 2016 | The question was raised by Barseghyan in his original formulation of scientonomy pp. 99-109, although he was unable to supply a normative answer. | Yes |
All Theories
If an answer to this question is missing, please click here to add it.
Accepted Theories
Suggested Modifications
Current View
There is currently no accepted answer to this question.
Related Topics
This question is a subquestion of Assessment of Scientonomy.
This topic is also related to the following topic(s):
References
- ^ Barseghyan, Hakob. (2015) The Laws of Scientific Change. Springer.
