Difference between revisions of "Scientific Change"
m (→Current View) |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Scientific change''' is defined as any change in a [[Scientific Mosaic|scientific mosaic]], i.e. a transition from one accepted theory to another or from one employed method to another. | + | '''Scientific change''' is defined as any change in a [[Scientific Mosaic|scientific mosaic]], i.e. a transition from one [[Theory Acceptance|accepted]] [[Theory|theory]] to another or from one [[Method Employment|employed]] [[Method|method]] to another. |
== Prehistory == | == Prehistory == | ||
Revision as of 17:30, 1 March 2016
Scientific change is defined as any change in a scientific mosaic, i.e. a transition from one accepted theory to another or from one employed method to another.
Prehistory
Prehistory here
History
Current View
Currently, "scientific change" denotes to any change in a scientific mosaic, be that a transition from one accepted theory to another or from one employed method to another.
Open Questions
• This definition is problematic as it inadvertently qualifies every change in a mosaic as scientific. However, it is clear that not all changes in a mosaic are scientific; some changes might take place in violation of the laws of scientific change. By current definition, even the most outrageous cases of politically influenced changes in a mosaic (e.g. the Lysenko case) quality as scientific. Now, how can the definition of "scientific change" be modified to exclude unscientific changes in a mosaic? In particular, how can it be accomplished without turning the laws of scientific change into tautologies?
