Difference between revisions of "Authority Delegation"

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|Question=What is '''authority delegation'''? How should it be ''defined''?
 
|Question=What is '''authority delegation'''? How should it be ''defined''?
 
|Topic Type=Definitional
 
|Topic Type=Definitional
 +
|Description=This is an interesting topic.
 
|Authors List=Nicholas Overgaard, Mirka Loiselle,
 
|Authors List=Nicholas Overgaard, Mirka Loiselle,
 
|Formulated Year=2016
 
|Formulated Year=2016
 +
|Prehistory=This is an interesting prehistory.
 +
|History=This is an interesting history.
 
}}
 
}}
 
{{Acceptance Record
 
{{Acceptance Record

Revision as of 16:32, 18 February 2017

What is authority delegation? How should it be defined?

This is an interesting topic.

In the scientonomic context, this term was first used by Nicholas Overgaard and Mirka Loiselle in 2016. The term is currently accepted by Scientonomy community.

In Scientonomy, the accepted definition of the term is:

  • Epistemic agent A is said to be delegating authority over question x to epistemic agent B iff (1) agent A accepts that agent B is an expert on question x and (2) agent A will accept a theory answering question x if agent B says so.

Broader History

This is an interesting prehistory.

Scientonomic History

This is an interesting 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):
CommunityAccepted FromAcceptance IndicatorsStill AcceptedAccepted UntilRejection Indicators
Scientonomy7 September 2016The publication of the article by Overgaard and Loiselle titled Authority Delegation is a good indication of acceptance of the question.Overgaard and Loiselle (2016)Yes

All Theories

The following theories have attempted to answer this question:
TheoryFormulationFormulated In
Authority Delegation (Overgaard-Loiselle-2016)Community A is said to be delegating authority over topic x to community B iff (1) community A accepts that community B is an expert on topic x and (2) community A will accept a theory on topic x if community B says so.2016
Authority Delegation (Patton-2019)Epistemic agent A is said to be delegating authority over question x to epistemic agent B iff (1) agent A accepts that agent B is an expert on question x and (2) agent A will accept a theory answering question x if agent B says so.2019

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

Accepted Theories

The following theories have been accepted as answers to this question:
CommunityTheoryAccepted FromAccepted Until
ScientonomyAuthority Delegation (Overgaard-Loiselle-2016)1 February 20176 February 2023
ScientonomyAuthority Delegation (Patton-2019)6 February 2023

Suggested Modifications

Here is a list of modifications concerning this topic:
Modification Community Date Suggested Summary Verdict Verdict Rationale Date Assessed
Sciento-2016-0003 Scientonomy 7 September 2016 Accept the notion of authority delegation. Accepted There was a community consensus that the concept of authority delegation is a significant contribution to scientonomy, as it "sheds light on the mechanism by which the more local, specialized mosaics of epistemic/scientific sub-communities gives rise to the more global scientific mosaic (of *the* Scientific Community), and all in terms of theories and methods".c1 It was also noted that the concept "has already been tacitly accepted by our community"c2 as it has been incorporated in some recent scientonomic research. One further suggestion was to continue refining the concept of authority delegation by focusing on cases "where the delegating community applies its own additional criteria before accepting what the experts tell them".c3 1 February 2017
Sciento-2019-0017 Scientonomy 26 December 2019 Accept the definitions of authority delegation, and its subtypes, that generalize the currently accepted definitions to apply to all epistemic agents, rather than only communities. Accepted The commentators found the modification uncontroversial.c1 c2 It was noted that the modification "merely attempts to capture what is already de facto accepted - namely, the idea that authority can be delegated by and to epistemic agents of all kinds (both communal and individual)" as indicated by the "fact that the canonical examples of authority delegation often involve individual experts (see, for example, Loiselle 2017)".c3 It was agreed that the modification "introduces a necessary rewording in the definitions of authority delegation and its species".c4 6 February 2023

Current View

In Scientonomy, the accepted definition of the term is Authority Delegation (Patton-2019).

Authority Delegation (Patton-2019) states: "Epistemic agent A is said to be delegating authority over question x to epistemic agent B iff (1) agent A accepts that agent B is an expert on question x and (2) agent A will accept a theory answering question x if agent B says so."

Authority Delegation (Patton-2019).png

The definition tweaks the original definition of the term by Overgaard and Loiselle to ensure that the relationship of authority delegation can obtain between epistemic agents of all types. It also substitutes question for topic, as the former is the proper scientonomic term that should be used.

Related Topics

References

  1. ^  Williams, Bernard. (2002) Truth and Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy. Princeton University Press.
  2. ^  Barseghyan, Hakob. (2015) The Laws of Scientific Change. Springer.
  3. a b  Bird, Alexander. (2000) Thomas Kuhn. Princeton University Press.
  4. ^  Coady, Cecil. (1994) Testimony, Observation and "Autonomous Knowledge". In Matilal and Charkrabarti (Eds.) (1994).
  5. ^  Lipton, Peter. (1998) The Epistemology of Testimony. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 29 (1), 1-31.
  6. ^  Kitcher, Phillip. (1993) The Advancement of Science: Science without Legend, Objectivity without Illusions. Oxford University Press.
  7. ^  Shapin, Steven. (1994) A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England. University of Chicago Press.
  8. ^  Hardwig, John. (1985) Epistemic Dependence. The Journal of Philosophy 82 (7), 335-349.
  9. ^  Porter, Theodore. (1995) Trust in Numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton University Press.