Difference between revisions of "Possibility of Scientonomy - Argument from Bad Track Record"
Paul Patton (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Topic |Question=How is scientonomy possible given the bad track record of previous attempts to create a general theory of scientific change? |Topic Type=Descriptive |Parent...") |
|||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
|Accepted From Day=1 | |Accepted From Day=1 | ||
|Accepted From Approximate=No | |Accepted From Approximate=No | ||
− | |Acceptance Indicators=This is when the community accepted its first answer to the question, Response to the Argument from Bad Track Record(Barseghyan-2015), which indicates that the question is itself legitimate. | + | |Acceptance Indicators=This is when the community accepted its first answer to the question, [[Response to the Argument from Bad Track Record (Barseghyan-2015)]], which indicates that the question is itself legitimate. |
|Still Accepted=Yes | |Still Accepted=Yes | ||
|Accepted Until Approximate=No | |Accepted Until Approximate=No | ||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 16:10, 30 March 2017
How is scientonomy possible given the bad track record of previous attempts to create a general theory of scientific change?
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.
In Scientonomy, the accepted answers to the question can be summarized as follows:
- The failures of past theories of scientific change do not imply the inevitability of future failure or that the enterprise in inherently unsound.
- Scientonomy is possible because the process of scientific change exhibits lawful general regularities.
Contents
Scientonomic History
Acceptance Record
Community | Accepted From | Acceptance Indicators | Still Accepted | Accepted Until | Rejection Indicators |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scientonomy | 1 January 2016 | This is when the community accepted its first answer to the question, Response to the Argument from Bad Track Record (Barseghyan-2015), which indicates that the question is itself legitimate. | Yes |
All Theories
Theory | Formulation | Formulated In |
---|---|---|
Response to the Argument from Bad Track Record (Barseghyan-2015) | The failures of past theories of scientific change do not imply the inevitability of future failure or that the enterprise in inherently unsound. | 2015 |
If an answer to this question is missing, please click here to add it.
Accepted Theories
Community | Theory | Accepted From | Accepted Until |
---|---|---|---|
Scientonomy | Response to the Argument from Bad Track Record (Barseghyan-2015) | 1 January 2016 |
Suggested Modifications
Current View
In Scientonomy, the accepted answers to the question are Response to the Argument from Bad Track Record (Barseghyan-2015) and Possibility of Scientonomy (Barseghyan-2015).
Response to the Argument from Bad Track Record (Barseghyan-2015) states: "The failures of past theories of scientific change do not imply the inevitability of future failure or that the enterprise in inherently unsound."
XXXX
Possibility of Scientonomy
Possibility of Scientonomy (Barseghyan-2015) states: "Scientonomy is possible because the process of scientific change exhibits lawful general regularities."
Related Topics
This question is a subquestion of Possibility of Scientonomy.