scholarly journals The Status of Normative Propositions in the Theory of Scientific Change

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Zoe Sebastien
Keyword(s):  
Logical Consequence ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Scientific Change ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Status ◽  
Third Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Theory Acceptance

The scope of the Theory of Scientific Change (TSC) encompasses any and all changes that occur in a given scientific mosaic, the set of all methods employed and theories accepted at a given time by a given scientific community. Currently, theory is defined as a set of propositions that attempts to describe something. This definition excludes normative propositions from the scope of the TSC. Normative theories, such as those of methodology or ethics, have been excluded since including them appears to give rise to a destructive paradox first identified by Joel Burkholder. There are many historical cases where employed scientific methods are known to conflict with professed methodologies. This seems to violate the third and zeroth laws of scientific change. By the third law, employed methods are deducible from accepted theories. But, this seems impossible in cases where methodologies and methods conflict. Under the zeroth law, all elements in the scientific mosaic are compatible with one another. But, that seems to be clearly not the case if methodologies and methods conflict with one another. In this paper, I argue that normative propositions such as methodologies can be included in the scientific mosaic as accepted theories without generating a paradox and that neither the third nor zeroth laws of scientific change need be violated. I outline my solution to the paradox of normative theories and conclude by describing some new and exciting avenues for future research that are now open.Suggested Modifications[Sciento-2016-0001]: Accept the following reformulation of the third law:The third law ≡ a method becomes employed only when it is deducible from some subset of other employed methods and accepted theories of the time. Consequently, accept that there is no paradox of normative theories: when an employed method and an accepted methodology are logically inconsistent with one another; it merely indicates that the employed method isn’t a logical consequence of the accepted methodology. By the third law, the employed method still follows from some accepted theories, but not from this particular methodology.  Reject the previous formulation of the third law; it can remain in use for educational purposes. [Sciento-2016-0002]: Provided that the preceding modification [Sciento-2016-0001] is accepted, accept the following taxonomy for theory, descriptive theory, normative theory, and methodology:Theory ≡ a set of propositions.Descriptive theory ≡ a theory that attempts to describe something.Normative theory ≡ a theory that attempts to prescribe something. Methodology ≡ a normative theory that prescribes the rules which ought to be employed in theory assessment.Modify the definition of theory acceptance to make it possible for both descriptive and normative theories to be accepted:Theory Acceptance ≡ a theory is said to be accepted if it is taken as the best available description or prescription of its object. Reject the previous definitions of theory, methodology, and theory acceptance. 

scholarly journals The Status of Questions in the Ontology of Scientific Change

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
William Rawleigh
Keyword(s):  
Basic Element ◽  
Scientific Change ◽  
Semantic Structure ◽  
Epistemic Agent ◽  
Distinct Class ◽  
Epistemic Stance ◽  
The Status ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Theory Acceptance ◽  
Scientific Questions

The currently accepted scientonomic ontology includes two classes of epistemic elements – theories and methods. However, the ontology underlying the Encyclopedia of Scientonomy includes questions/topics as a basic element of its semantic structure. Ideally there should be no discrepancy between the accepted ontology of theoretical scientonomy and that of the Encyclopedia.  I argue that questions constitute a distinct class of epistemic elements as they are not reducible to other elements that undergo scientific change – theories or methods. I discuss and reject two attempts at reducing questions to either descriptive or normative theories. According to the descriptive-epistemic account, scientific questions can be logically reduced to descriptive propositions, while according to the normative-epistemic account, they can be reduced to normative propositions. I show that these interpretations are incapable of capturing the propositional content expressed by questions; any possible reduction is carried at the expense of losing the essential characteristic of questions. Further, I find that the attempts to reduce questions to theories introduce an infinite regress, where a theory is an attempt to answer a question, which is itself a theory which answers another question, ad infintum. Instead, I propose to incorporate the question-answer semantic structure from erotetic logic in which questions constitute a distinct class of elements irreducible to propositions. An acceptance of questions into scientonomic ontology as a separate class of epistemic elements suggests a new avenue of research into the mechanism of question acceptance and rejection, i.e. how epistemic communities come to accept certain questions as legitimate and others as illegitimate. Suggested Modifications [Sciento-2018-0001]: Accept the following definition of question: Question ≡ a topic of inquiry. [Sciento-2018-0002]: Accept the ontology of epistemic elements with theories, methods, and questions as distinct epistemic elements. Reject the previously accepted ontology of epistemic elements. [Sciento-2018-0003]: Provided that modification [Sciento-2018-0002] is accepted, accept that the epistemic stance that can be taken by an epistemic agent towards a question is question acceptance (the opposite is unacceptance), defined as follows:  Question Acceptance ≡ a question is said to be accepted if it is taken as a legitimate topic of inquiry. [Sciento-2018-0004]: Provided that modifications [Sciento-2018-0002] and [Sciento-2018-0003] are accepted, accept the following question as legitimate topics of scientonomic inquiry:  Mechanism of Question Acceptance: How do questions become accepted as legitimate? What is the mechanism of question acceptance?  Indicators of Question Acceptance: What are the historical indicators of theory acceptance? How can observational scientonomists establish that such-and-such a question was accepted as a legitimate topic of inquiry by a certain epistemic agent at a certain time?

scholarly journals Redrafting the Ontology of Scientific Change

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 13-38
Author(s):  
Hakob Barseghyan
Keyword(s):  
Normative Theory ◽  
Scientific Change ◽  
Epistemic Agent ◽  
Theory Evaluation ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Previous Definition ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Descriptive Theories ◽  
Theory Acceptance

Recent developments in theoretical scientonomy coupled with a reflection on the practice of the Encyclopedia of Scientonomy all suggest that the ontology of scientific change currently accepted in scientonomy has serious flaws. The new ontology, suggested in this paper, solves some of the issues permeating the current ontology. Building on Rawleigh’s suggestion, it considers a theory as an attempt to answer a certain question. It also introduces the category of definition as a subtype of theory. It also reveals that methods and methodologies of the currently accepted ontology do not differ from the perspective of their propositional content and, thus, belong to the same class of epistemic elements. This is captured in the new definition of method as a set of criteria for theory evaluation. It is also argued that methods are a subtype of normative theories. It is shown that normative theories of all types, including methods, ethical norms, and aesthetic norms, can be both accepted and employed. Finally, a new definition of scientific mosaic is suggested to fit the new ontology.   Suggested Modifications [Sciento-2018-0005]: Accept the following definitions of method and methodology: Method ≡ a set of criteria for theory evaluation.  Methodology ≡ a normative discipline that formulates the rules which ought to be employed in theory assessment. Reject the previous definitions of method and methodology. [Sciento-2018-0006]: Accept the following ontology of epistemic elements, where:  Each theory is an attempt to answer a certain question. Theories can be of three types – descriptive, normative, or definitions. Method is a subtype of normative theory. Questions as well as theories of all types – including methods – can be accepted. Normative theories of all types can be employed; the name of the stance is norm employment. Accept the following definition of theory acceptance: Theory acceptance ≡ a theory is said to be accepted by the epistemic agent if it is taken as the best available answer to its respective question. Also accept the following questions as legitimate topics of inquiry: Role of Definitions in Scientific Change: Do definitions play any distinct role in the process of scientific change, or do they only exhibit the exact same patterns as descriptive and normative theories? Reducibility of Definitions: Are definitions a distinct subtype of theory, or are they somehow reducible to descriptive theories and/or normative theories? Reject the previous ontology of epistemic elements and the previous definition of theory acceptance. [Sciento-2018-0007]: Accept the following definition of definition: Definition ≡ A statement of the meaning of a term. [Sciento-2018-0008]: Provided that modification [Sciento-2018-0006] is accepted, accept the following definition of norm employment: Norm Employment ≡ a norm is said to be employed if its requirements constitute the actual expectations of the epistemic agent.  [Sciento-2018-0009]: Accept the new definition of scientific mosaic: Scientific Mosaic ≡ a set of all epistemic elements accepted and/or employed by the epistemic agent.  Reject the previous definition of scientific mosaic. [Sciento-2018-0010]: Accept that: Epistemic stances of all types can be taken explicitly and/or implicitly. Epistemic elements of all types can be explicit and/or implicit. Accept the following question as a legitimate topic of inquiry: Tracing Implicit/Explicit: Should observational scientonomy trace when a certain stance towards an epistemic element was taken explicitly or implicitly? What are the practical considerations for and against collecting and storing this data?

The Third Law in Newton's Mechanics

1968 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roderick W. Home
Keyword(s):  
Operational Definition ◽  
Historical Aspects ◽  
The Third ◽  
The World ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Third Law ◽  
Newton’S Laws ◽  
Philosophical Viewpoint ◽  
Definition Of

Most modern analysts of Newton's laws of motion, whether they have approached the subject from a historical or from a philosophical viewpoint, have tended to concentrate on the status of the first two laws; the third law has largely been overlooked, or else it has been dismissed as somehow less interesting. My purpose in this paper is to reverse this approach—I intend to investigate some of the historical aspects of the third law, particularly the empirical background to Newton's statement of it, and in so doing, I intend to skirt most of the questions which have been raised concerning the status of the other two laws. In concentrating on the historical aspects of the third law, I shall also by-pass Mach's controversial re-interpretation of its role in mechanics, for while Mach saw the law as the basis for an operational definition of “mass”, it is quite clear that Newton did not so regard it. On the contrary, Newton seems to have regarded all three of his laws as straightforward statements of fact about the world, so that a knowledge of the factual background to the laws is a fundamental pre-requisite to an understanding of Newton's thought.

scholarly journals The Proposal of a Evolutionary Strategy Generating the Data Structures Based on a Horizontal Tree for the Tests

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 145-149
Author(s):  
Marek Żukowicz ◽  
Michał Markiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Mathematical Model ◽  
Evolutionary Algorithm ◽  
Computer Science ◽  
Data Structures ◽  
Evolutionary Strategy ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Object Model ◽  
The Third ◽  
Testing Data ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract The aim of the article is to present a mathematical definition of the object model, that is known in computer science as TreeList and to show application of this model for design evolutionary algorithm, that purpose is to generate structures based on this object. The first chapter introduces the reader to the problem of presenting data using the TreeList object. The second chapter describes the problem of testing data structures based on TreeList. The third one shows a mathematical model of the object TreeList and the parameters, used in determining the utility of structures created through this model and in evolutionary strategy, that generates these structures for testing purposes. The last chapter provides a brief summary and plans for future research related to the algorithm presented in the article.

Mobile-Assisted Language Learning

2018 ◽  
pp. 172-186
Author(s):  
Elham Mohammadi ◽  
Zahra Sadat Shirkamar
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Asynchronous Learning ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences ◽  
Mobile Assisted Language Learning ◽  
The Status ◽  
Based Instruction ◽  
Definition Of

Nowadays every aspect of humans' life, including education, is affected by technological advancements. Given this, teaching and learning have gone through various changes and are now space- and time-independent in the sense that they can happen at any time anywhere. MALL as a type of IT-based instruction has been popular in many developed countries, while in the developing countries the attitude and requirements for its implementation are not yet ready. In the present chapter, an attempt has been made to review the definition of MALL, synchronous/asynchronous learning, learners' perception of MALL, the status of MALL in developed and developing countries, and finally the challenges facing developing countries for implementing MALL in their educational systems. It also tries to give an insight into the cross-cultural differences affecting the use and implementation of MALL and admits there are further avenues to explore variables mediating the application of new technologies in different cultural settings. In the end, some solutions and recommendations for future research are offered.

Kant, Rabe e la logica aristotelica

2009 ◽  
pp. 269-293
Author(s):  
Marco Sgarbi
Keyword(s):  
The Third ◽  
Fourth Part ◽  
The Status ◽  
Definition Of

- This article shows the influence of the Aristotelian Paul Rabe on Immanuel Kant's philosophy. In the first part, I reconstruct the status quaestions regarding Rabe in Aristotelian studies and in Kantforschung. The second part looks at Rabe's life and works. It is demonstrated in the third part that Kant's definition of dialectic as Logik des Scheins comes from Rabe's definition of dialectic as logica ex apparentibus. The fourth part shows the Aristotelian origin of Kant's doctrine of categories and schema and the fifth analyses the meaning of Rabe's Analytica and its legacy in Kant. In the sixth section, the Aristotelian distinction kat'anthropon-kat'aletheian is examined in Rabe and Kant. The conclusion suggests that the chapter "Idee einer transzendentalen Logik" in Kritik der reinen Vernunft is an Einladungsschrift and that Kant became acquainted with Aristotle's writings mainly between 1766 and 1772 when he was librarian at the Schlossbibliothek in Königsberg.

scholarly journals The Status of Technological Knowledge in the Scientific Mosaic

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 39-53
Author(s):  
Maxim Mirkin
Keyword(s):  
Technological Knowledge ◽  
Propositional Knowledge ◽  
Scientific Change ◽  
Scientific Communities ◽  
Sorting Algorithms ◽  
Mode Of Operation ◽  
The Status ◽  
History Of ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Technological Methods

In this paper, I argue that there is accepted propositional technological knowledge which appears to exhibit the same patterns of change as questions, theories, and methods in the natural, social, and formal sciences. I show that technological theories attempting to describe the construction and operation of artifacts as well as to prescribe their correct mode of operation are not merely used, but also often accepted by epistemic agents. Since technology often involves methods different from those found in science and produces normative propositions, many of which remain tacit, one may be tempted to think that changes in technological knowledge should be somehow exempt from the laws of scientific change. Indeed, it seems tacitly accepted in the scientonomic community that, while scientific communities clearly accept theories, technological communities merely use them. As a result, scientonomy currently deals with natural, social, and formal sciences, and the status of technological knowledge within the scientonomic ontology remains unclear. To help elucidate the topic, I propose that the historical cases of sorting algorithms, telescopes, crop rotation, and colorectal cancer surgeries confirm that technological theories and methods are often an integral part of an epistemic agent’s mosaic and seem to exhibit the same scientonomic patterns of change typical of accepted theories therein. Thus, I suggest that propositional technological knowledge can be part of a mosaic.   Suggested Modifications [Sciento-2018-0011]: Accept the three-fold distinction between explicit, explicable-implicit, and inexplicable with the following definitions: Explicit ≡ propositional knowledge that has been openly formulated by the agent. Explicable-Implicit ≡ propositional knowledge that hasn’t been openly formulated by the agent. Inexplicable ≡ non-propositional knowledge, i.e. knowledge that cannot, even in principle, be formulated as a set of propositions. Also accept the following definition of implicit: Implicit ≡ not explicit. [Sciento-2018-0012]: Accept that propositional technological knowledge – i.e. technological questions, theories, and methods – can be part of a mosaic. Also accept the following questions as legitimate topics of scientonomic inquiry:  History of Technological Mosaics: What technological theories were accepted and what technological methods were employed by different epistemic agents at different time periods? The Status of Inexplicable Knowledge: Is there such a thing as inexplicable knowledge? Typology of Technological Knowledge: What types of technological knowledge are there?

Subsidiary Liability of Actually Controlling Persons in Cases of Bankruptcy: Theory and Judicial Practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 72-85
Author(s):  
A. V. Efimov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Practice Research ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Status ◽  
Degree Of Certainty ◽  
General Scientific ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Actual Control

Currently, the problem of subsidiary liability of controlling persons is complicated by the specifics of the status of persons who are not in legal relations with the debtor, but actually control it. The identification of actually controlling persons is difficult due to the insufficient certainty of the signs of actual control. It is important to note that the degree of certainty of the signs of actual control at the level of legal regulation affects the accuracy of the qualifications of persons as controllers when considering specific court cases. The purpose of this article is to formulate theoretical conclusions on the identification and prosecution of actually controlling persons on the basis of judicial practice. Research objectives: assessment of the legal regulation of subsidiary liability of controlling persons; assessment of situations of actual control; identification of signs of actual control. This article is based on general scientific methods (systemic, functional, a group of logical methods such as deduction, induction, analysis, synthesis) and special legal methods (formal legal, legal modeling method). As a result, it was concluded that the definition of controlling persons includes both persons who are in legal relations with a legal entity (nominal control), and persons who are not in legal relations with a legal entity, but nevertheless have the ability to provide actual the control. Since the signs of actual control are insufficiently defined at the level of legal regulation, problems of subsidiary liability of actually controlling persons arise in judicial practice. It was revealed that the courts qualify actual control due to circumstances that indicate either the exercise of specific powers of the debtor's bodies directly by the actually controlling persons; or that the powers of the debtor's bodies are exercised by nominal controlling persons, but their will is formed by actually controlling persons.

Cyberbullying

2019 ◽  
pp. 94-120
Author(s):  
Michelle F. Wright ◽  
Bridgette D. Harper
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
High School ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Computer Science ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Sequential Designs ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Academic Difficulties ◽  
The Third ◽  
Definition Of

The purpose of this literature review is to describe youths' involvement in cyberbullying. The term “youths” refers to individuals in elementary school, middle school, and high school. The chapter begins by providing a description of cyberbullying and the definition of cyberbullying. The next section describes the characteristics and risk factors associated with youths' involvement in cyberbullying. The third section focuses on the psychological, social, behavioral, and academic difficulties associated with youths' involvement in cyberbullying. The chapter concludes with recommendations for schools and parents as well as recommendations for future research. The chapter draws on research utilizing quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, cross-sectional, longitudinal, and cross-sequential designs, and those from various disciplines, including psychology, communication, media studies, sociology, social work, and computer science.

Comparative Analysis of the Status of the Network Protocol Reverse Engineering

2014 ◽  
Vol 590 ◽  
pp. 722-726
Author(s):  
Huan Qi Tao ◽  
Fan Jia ◽  
Yang Wang
Keyword(s):  
Reverse Engineering ◽  
Reference Model ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Actual Situation ◽  
New Directions ◽  
The Status ◽  
Protocol Reverse Engineering ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Application Fields ◽  
The Ideal

In order to quickly grasp the actual situation of the current protocol reverse solution, commonly used terms first collection protocol reverse engineering field, to describe the protocol reverse engineering and the formal definition of the protocol reverse reference model; then summarizes the existing protocol reverse solution in the main analysis techniques and algorithms, and discusses the application fields of reverse technology protocol; finally describes between actual situation and the ideal current protocol reverse engineering of the gap, and points out the defects existing in the current scheme monk unsolved problems, explore new directions for future research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document