scholarly journals Scientificity and The Law of Theory Demarcation

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 55-66
Author(s):  
Ameer Sarwar ◽  
Patrick Thomas Fraser
Keyword(s):  
Conference Proceedings ◽  
Scientific Change ◽  
Epistemic Stance ◽  
The Law ◽  
Demarcation Criteria ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Historical Indicators

The demarcation between science and non-science seems to play an important role in the process of scientific change, as theories regularly transition from being considered scientific to being considered unscientific and vice versa. However, theoretical scientonomy is yet to shed light on this process. The goal of this paper is to tackle the problem of demarcation from the scientonomic perspective. Specifically, we introduce scientificity as a distinct epistemic stance that an agent can take towards a theory. We contend that changes in this stance are to be traced and explained by scientonomy. Thus, we formulate a new law of theory demarcation to account for changes in scientificity within the scientonomic framework.   Suggested Modifications [Sciento-2018-0013]: Accept scientificity as a distinct epistemic stance that epistemic agents can take towards theories. Also accept the following questions as legitimate topics of scientonomic inquiry: Scientificity: How should scientificity be defined? Scientificity of Methods: Can the epistemic stance of scientificity be taken towards methods? Can there be unscientific or pseudoscientific methods? Scientificity of Questions: Can the epistemic stance of scientificity be taken towards questions? Can there be unscientific or pseudoscientific questions?   [Sciento-2018-0014]: Accept the following law as a new scientonomic axiom: The Law of Theory Demarcation: if a theory satisfies the demarcation criteria of the method employed at the time, it becomes scientific; if it does not, it remains unscientific; if assessment is inconclusive, the theory’s status can become scientific, unscientific, or uncertain. Accept that the law of theory demarcation is not a tautology. Also accept the following questions as legitimate topics of scientonomic inquiry: Indicators of Theory Scientificity: What are the historical indicators of a theory’s scientificity? Can traditional indicators like textbooks, encyclopedias, conference proceedings, and journals be used to determine if evaluation by the demarcation criteria took place? Indicators of Conclusiveness for Scientificity Assessment: What are the historical indicators that an assessment by the demarcation criteria was conclusive or inconclusive? Does the lack of agreement or evidence count in favor of inconclusive assessment outcome?

scholarly journals A Compatibility Law and the Classification of Theory Change

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 67-82
Author(s):  
Patrick Thomas Fraser ◽  
Ameer Sarwar
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Theory ◽  
Theory Change ◽  
Epistemic Stance ◽  
Current Formulation ◽  
Previous Definition ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Theory Acceptance ◽  
Demarcation Criteria

The current formulation of the zeroth law (the law of compatibility) is marred with a number of theoretical problems, which necessitate its reformulation. In this paper, we propose that compatibility is an independent stance that can be taken towards epistemic elements of all types. We then provide a new definition of compatibility criteria to reflect this change. We show that the content of the zeroth law is deducible from our definition of compatibility. Instead of a static law of compatibility, we propose a new dynamic law of compatibility that explains how the stance of compatibility obtains. Unlike the zeroth law, this new law has empirical content, as it forbids certain conceivable scenarios. Having established these notions, we propose a classification space that exhaustively covers all the possible states a theory may occupy and all the transitions it may undergo during its lifecycle.   Suggested Modifications [Sciento-2018-0015]: Accept the following definition of compatibility: Compatibility ≡ the ability of two elements to coexist in the same mosaic. Also accept the following corollary: Compatibility Corollary: at any moment of time, the elements of the scientific mosaic are compatible with each other. Accept that all theorems that take the current zeroth law as their premise are recoverable when the compatibility corollary is used as a premise instead.  Reject the zeroth law.   [Sciento-2018-0016]: Accept compatibility as a distinct epistemic stance that can be taken towards epistemic elements of all types. Also accept that compatibility is binary, reflexive, and symmetric. Transitivity of compatibility holds only within mosaics, not sui generis.   [Sciento-2018-0017]: Accept the following definition of compatibility criteria: Compatibility Criteria ≡ criteria for determining whether two elements are compatible or incompatible. Reject the previous definition of compatibility criteria.   [Sciento-2018-0018]: Accept the following law of compatibility as a scientonomic axiom: The Law of Compatibility: if a pair of elements satisfies the compatibility criteria employed at the time, it becomes compatible within the mosaic; if it does not, it is deemed incompatible; and if assessment is inconclusive, the pair can become compatible, incompatible, or its status may be unknown.   [Sciento-2018-0019]: Accept the new definition of theory acceptance: Theory Acceptance ≡ an accepted theory is a scientific theory that is taken as the best available description or prescription of its object. Reject the previous definition of theory acceptance.   [Sciento-2018-0020]: Accept the following theorem: Demarcation-Acceptance Synchronism theorem: every theory that becomes accepted satisfies the demarcation criteria employed at the time of 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?

Der Begriff des Tochterunternehmens im Recht der Beteiligungstransparenz und im Übernahmerecht

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Wildhirth
Keyword(s):  
Capital Market ◽  
Parent Company ◽  
The Law ◽  
Securities Trading ◽  
A Company ◽  
Group Law ◽  
Shed Light

Capital market players are regularly part of a group of companies. The classification of a company as a subsidiary has significant effects on the subsidiary and the parent company. In the law on transparency of shareholdings and takeover law, membership in such a group of companies is decided based on the concept of subsidiary in Section 35 (1) of the German Securities Trading Act (WpHG) and Section 2 (6) of the German Securities Acquisition and Takeover Act (WpÜG). These definitions are analysed in depth to shed light on capital market group law. The European foundations as well as the purpose of the regulations are particularly examined. Finally, the results found are verified by analyzing GmbH & Co. KG structures.

The Flexibility of Torah

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Hayes
Keyword(s):  
Human Beings ◽  
Natural Evolution ◽  
The Law ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Divine Law

This chapter examines sources that shed light on a variety of issues bearing on the question of the flexibility of the divine law of Israel according to the talmudic rabbis. In many of these sources, the Law is seen to be susceptible to change through rational adjustments by humans. The rhetoric surrounding human adjustment of the Law varies. In some passages these adjustments are represented as a kind of natural evolution justified by values and commitments internal to the system. In some passages, however, they are represented as interventions based on values and commitments external to the system, raising important questions about the agency and authority of human beings in a system of divine law. On what grounds do humans modify the Law? How is it that rational modification of the Law and the implied fallibility of the divine lawgiver do not impinge upon the Law's divinity in the eyes of the rabbis?

The Strange Entanglement of Jurimorphs

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Latour
Keyword(s):  
Bruno Latour ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Shed Light

Bruno Latour closes out this volume by taking hold of several threads running through the preceding chapters. In addition to responding to a few of the criticisms that have cropped up, Latour offers remarks on the specific analyses developed in several of the chapters in order to shed light on crucial elements of the AIME project and his view of the legal mode of existence, addressing among other things domains, institutions, normativity, jurimorphs and a few modal crossings stimulated by the work of the book’s contributors. The outlines of a new concept – the red letter of the law – even begin to take shape as Latour moves between and among the compelling and original arguments of the individual chapters.

scholarly journals Direito transnacional do trabalho e constituição global

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 6
Author(s):  
Antonio Ojeda Avilés
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Labor Law ◽  
Economic Globalization ◽  
Common Phenomenon ◽  
Transnational Actors ◽  
The Law ◽  
Globalized World ◽  
Shed Light

<p class="Standard"><span lang="PT-BR"><strong>RESUMO:</strong></span></p><p class="Standard">Trata-se de artigo que pretende enfrentar o surgimento do chamado Direito Transnacional do Trabalho, como ramo autônomo do Direito, a partir da análise de seus interlocutores e da vinculatividade de sua atuação. Para tanto, examinamse os fatores que culminaram no fenômeno sob análise, tais como a globalização digital e econômica e a repercussão e a violação mundial das violações aos direitos humanos. Os pontos de partida são diversos episódios de danos causados por transnacionais no último século. O estudo teve por objetivo lançar luz no fenômeno cada vez mais comum e forte decorrente da atuação das transnacionais em um mercado globalizado. </p><p> </p><p><strong>ABSTRACT:</strong></p><p>The present article intends to deal with the emergence of the so-called Transnational Labor Law, understood as an autonomous branch of the Law. The analysis is focused on transnational actors and the binding character of their actions. It is examined the factors that resulted in the phenomenon under analysis, such as digital and economic globalization and the repercussion and global violation of human rights. The points of departure are several instances of damages caused by transnational employers in the last century. The objective of this study was to shed light on the increasingly common phenomenon that result from the action of transnational actors on a globalized world.   </p><p> </p><p><strong>Errata: </strong>O artigo foi recebido em maio 17, 2018 e aceito em maio 18, 2018</p>

The Legal Rendering of Immiseration

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Linarelli ◽  
Margot E Salomon ◽  
Muthucumaraswamy Sornarajah
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Economic Globalization ◽  
Political Values ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Pluralist Approach ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Critical Project

This chapter introduces the reader to the ideas and arguments that animate this wide-ranging book. Whereas many works focus on violations of international law, this book is concerned with the law itself. It seeks to demonstrate how the truth about the role and effects of the law in the creation and perpetuation of misery fail adequately to inform it. From its early inception to the present day, international law has always been predicated on private property and commodification and so the social and political values that are constitutive of economies as much as property and contract have, in important ways, been forsaken. In laying the ground, this chapter distinguishes fact from fiction in the nature and scale of harms and alienations, to introduce the pluralist approach taken in this critique of international law. In that diverse traditions from liberal to radical shed light on the problems and their possible redress, it is explained in this chapter how the book engages these various traditions. In calling for a ‘predistributive’ international law, the chapter foregrounds the need to move from mere redistribution to making international law just in the first place, in a structural sense. In its coverage of what this book is and is not about, this first chapter seeks to unshackle the reader from deep-rooted assumptions that frame the debates around economic globalization and to begin the critical project of exploring how international law is both constituted by capitalism and constitutive of it and with what implications for justice reasonably understood.

scholarly journals Universal models and definability

2011 ◽  
Vol 152 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
OLIVIA CARAMELLO
Keyword(s):  
Topos Theory ◽  
Universal Models ◽  
Law Of Excluded Middle ◽  
The Law ◽  
Excluded Middle ◽  
Shed Light

AbstractWe establish some general results on universal models in Topos Theory and show that the investigation of such models can shed light on problems of definability in Logic as well as on De Morgan's law and the law of excluded middle for Grothendieck toposes.

The “Production” of Corruption in China's Courts: Judicial Politics and Decision Making in a One-Party State

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (04) ◽  
pp. 848-877 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ling Li
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Deviant Behavior ◽  
Judicial Politics ◽  
Proper Understanding ◽  
Rule By Law ◽  
Black Sheep ◽  
Judicial Corruption ◽  
The Law ◽  
Party State ◽  
Shed Light

Despite its rampant presence, judicial corruption in China has often been regarded as the idiosyncratically deviant behavior of a few black sheep eluding prescribed judicial conduct. This entrenched assumption has both discouraged in-depth investigation of the phenomenon of judicial corruption and inhibited proper understanding of the functioning of China's courts. This article, based on an empirically grounded examination of the processing of court rulings tainted by corruption, showed that judicial corruption in China is an institutionalized activity systemically inherent in the particular decision-making mechanism guided by the Chinese Communist Party's instrumental rule-by-law ideal. In investigating what has contributed to the institutionalization of judicial corruption, the interplay between law and party politics in China's courts was also examined. The findings, therefore, also shed light on behind-the-courtroom judicial activities and on the enduring perplexity of the gap between the law in the book and the law in action.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document