Difference between revisions of "Individual Level"
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
|||
(18 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | {{Topic | + | {{Definitional Topic |
|Question=What is '''individual level?''' How should it be ''defined?'' | |Question=What is '''individual level?''' How should it be ''defined?'' | ||
− | + | |Description=''Individual level'' is one of the key concepts in current scientonomy. Thus, its proper definition is of great importance. When analyzing the role of the individual level throughout the scientific change it is important to look at individual figures throughout the history of science. A lot of the times their views affected in a way the scientific mosaic of the time and their work allows us to understand the possible cause of the shift in methods and theories. | |
− | |Description=''Individual level'' is one of the key concepts in current scientonomy. Thus, its proper definition is of great importance. | ||
− | |||
|Authors List=Hakob Barseghyan, | |Authors List=Hakob Barseghyan, | ||
|Formulated Year=2015 | |Formulated Year=2015 | ||
− | | | + | |Prehistory=Prior to the 20th century, epistemology of science has dealt primarily with how ''individuals'' produce and evaluate knowledge.[[CiteRef::Longino (2016a)|p. 4]] This focus on the knowledge of the individual characterizes both the empiricist tradition of Locke and Hume, and the rationalist tradition of Descartes and Leibniz.[[CiteRef::Longino (2016a)|p. 4]] |
− | |Related Topics=Scientific Mosaic | + | |
+ | Despite the growing attention to the knowledge of ''social'' epistemic agents, many 20th century authors still focused on the belief systems of individual scientists (e.g. Feyerabend's focus on Galileo).[[CiteRef::Feyerabend (1975a)]]) Even in the famous Virginia Polytechnic Institute (VPI) project which aimed at testing theoretical claims against the historical data, most authors focused largely on individuals. For example, Finocchiaro sets to test some general claims bout the process of scientific change by focusing on the belief system of Galileo and his acceptance of Copernicanism.[[CiteRef::Donovan, Laudan, and Laudan (Eds.) (1988)|p. 18]] | ||
+ | |Related Topics=Scientific Mosaic, Mechanism of Scientific Change, Social Level, | ||
+ | |Page Status=Stub | ||
+ | |Editor Notes=The prehistory is extremely poorly written. I've fixed it a bit, but there is more work to be done. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Acceptance Record | {{Acceptance Record |
Latest revision as of 21:48, 11 December 2022
What is individual level? How should it be defined?
Individual level is one of the key concepts in current scientonomy. Thus, its proper definition is of great importance. When analyzing the role of the individual level throughout the scientific change it is important to look at individual figures throughout the history of science. A lot of the times their views affected in a way the scientific mosaic of the time and their work allows us to understand the possible cause of the shift in methods and theories.
In the scientonomic context, this term was first used by Hakob Barseghyan in 2015. The term is currently accepted by Scientonomy community.
In Scientonomy, the accepted definition of the term is:
- The level of the beliefs of the individual scientist about the world and the rules she employs in theory assessment.
Contents
Broader History
Prior to the 20th century, epistemology of science has dealt primarily with how individuals produce and evaluate knowledge.1p. 4 This focus on the knowledge of the individual characterizes both the empiricist tradition of Locke and Hume, and the rationalist tradition of Descartes and Leibniz.1p. 4
Despite the growing attention to the knowledge of social epistemic agents, many 20th century authors still focused on the belief systems of individual scientists (e.g. Feyerabend's focus on Galileo).2) Even in the famous Virginia Polytechnic Institute (VPI) project which aimed at testing theoretical claims against the historical data, most authors focused largely on individuals. For example, Finocchiaro sets to test some general claims bout the process of scientific change by focusing on the belief system of Galileo and his acceptance of Copernicanism.3p. 18
Scientonomic History
Acceptance Record
Community | Accepted From | Acceptance Indicators | Still Accepted | Accepted Until | Rejection Indicators |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scientonomy | 1 January 2016 | Yes |
All Theories
Theory | Formulation | Formulated In |
---|---|---|
Individual Level (Barseghyan-2015) | The level of the beliefs of the individual scientist about the world and the rules she employs in theory assessment. | 2015 |
Accepted Theories
Community | Theory | Accepted From | Accepted Until |
---|---|---|---|
Scientonomy | Individual Level (Barseghyan-2015) | 1 January 2016 |
Suggested Modifications
Current Definition
In Scientonomy, the accepted definition of the term is Individual Level (Barseghyan-2015).
Individual Level (Barseghyan-2015) states: "The level of the beliefs of the individual scientist about the world and the rules she employs in theory assessment."
By the individual level Barseghyan means an "individual scientist who has her own set of ideas and beliefs about the world, and employs certain methods which might be different than the accepted methods of the time".4p. 43
Ontology
Existence
There is currently no accepted view concerning the existence of individual levels.
Disjointness
No classes are currently accepted as being disjoint with this class.
Subtypes
No classes are currently accepted as subtypes of an individual level.
Supertypes
No classes are currently accepted as supertypes of an individual level.
Associations
No associations of an individual level are currently accepted.
If a question concerning the ontology of an individual level is missing, please add it here.
Dynamics
If a question concerning the dynamics of an individual level is missing, please add it here.
Related Topics
This term is also related to the following topic(s):
References
- a b Longino, Helen. (2016) The Social Dimensions of Scientific Knowledge. In Zalta (Ed.) (2016). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/scientific-knowledge-social/.
- ^ Feyerabend, Paul. (1975) Against Method. New Left Books.
- ^ Donovan, Arthur; Laudan, Larry and Laudan, Rachel. (Eds.). (1988) Scrutinizing Science: Empirical Studies of Scientific Change. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
- ^ Barseghyan, Hakob. (2015) The Laws of Scientific Change. Springer.