Difference between revisions of "Status of Disciplinary Boundaries"

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{Topic |Question=How do disciplinary boundaries exist within the scientific mosaic? |Topic Type=Descriptive |Description=The scientific mosaic consists...")
 
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|Question=How do disciplinary boundaries exist within the scientific mosaic?
 
|Question=How do disciplinary boundaries exist within the scientific mosaic?
 
|Topic Type=Descriptive
 
|Topic Type=Descriptive
|Description=The [[Scientific Mosaic|scientific mosaic]] consists of the set of all accepted [[Theory|theories]] and employed [[Method|methods]] at some particular time. How do disciplinary boundaries exist within the mosaic.  Perhaps as theories?
+
|Description=The [[Scientific Mosaic|scientific mosaic]] consists of the set of all accepted [[Theory|theories]] and employed [[Method|methods]] at some particular time. How do disciplinary boundaries exist within the mosaic: are they expressible as theories and/or methods?
 +
|Parent Topic=Ontology of Scientific Change
 
|Authors List=Hakob Barseghyan,
 
|Authors List=Hakob Barseghyan,
 
|Formulated Year=2016
 
|Formulated Year=2016
 
|Academic Events=Scientonomy Seminar 2016,
 
|Academic Events=Scientonomy Seminar 2016,
|Related Topics=Community, Mosaic Bearers, Authority Delegation,
 
 
}}
 
}}
 
{{Acceptance Record
 
{{Acceptance Record

Revision as of 23:33, 23 January 2017

How do disciplinary boundaries exist within the scientific mosaic?

Nicholas Overgaard explains the topic

The scientific mosaic consists of the set of all accepted theories and employed methods at some particular time. How do disciplinary boundaries exist within the mosaic: are they expressible as theories and/or methods?

In the scientonomic context, this term was first used by Hakob Barseghyan in 2016. The term is currently accepted by Scientonomy community.

Scientonomic 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
Scientonomy1 April 2016It was acknowledged as an open question by the Scientonomy Seminar 2016.Yes

All Theories

The following theories have attempted to answer this question:
TheoryFormulationFormulated In
Discipline (Patton-Al-Zayadi-2021)A discipline is characterized by (1) a non-empty set of core questions Q and (2) the delineating theory stating that Q are the core questions of the discipline.2021

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

Accepted Theories

According to our records, no theory on this topic has ever been accepted.

Suggested Modifications

Here is a list of modifications concerning this topic:
Modification Community Date Suggested Summary Verdict Verdict Rationale Date Assessed
Sciento-2021-0006 Scientonomy 1 August 2021 Accept new definitions of subquestion, core question, core theory, discipline, delineating theory, subdiscipline, and discipline acceptance. Open

Current View

There is currently no accepted answer to this question.


Related Topics

This question is a subquestion of Ontology of Scientific Change.

This topic is also related to the following topic(s):

References

  1. a b  Godfrey-Smith, Peter. (2003) Theory and Reality. University of Chicago Press.
  2. ^  Lakatos, Imre. (1970) Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. In Lakatos (1978a), 8-101.
  3. ^  Kuhn, Thomas. (1973) Objectivity, Value Judgement, and Theory Choice. In Kuhn (1977a), 320-339.
  4. a b c d e  Becher, Tony. (1981) Towards a Definition of Disciplinary Cultures. Studies in Higher Education 6 (2), 109-122.