Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

The Status of Questions in the Ontology of Scientific Change

View through CrossRef
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?
Title: The Status of Questions in the Ontology of Scientific Change
Description:
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? .

Related Results

“The Earth Is Dying, Bro”
“The Earth Is Dying, Bro”
Climate Change and Children Australian children are uniquely situated in a vast landscape that varies drastically across locations. Spanning multiple climatic zones—from cool tempe...
Development and Evaluation of an Adolescents' Depression Ontology for Analyzing Social Data
Development and Evaluation of an Adolescents' Depression Ontology for Analyzing Social Data
This study aims to develop and evaluate an ontology for adolescents' depression to be used for collecting and analyzing social data. The ontology was developed according to the &am...
Extracting and Merging Contextualized Ontology Modules
Extracting and Merging Contextualized Ontology Modules
Ontology module extraction, from a large ontology, leads to the generation of a specialized knowledge model that is pertinent to specific problems. Existing ontology module extract...
ONTOLOGY OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC RESEARCH
ONTOLOGY OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC RESEARCH
Introduction. The ontology of socio-economic research contributes to a deeper understanding of the foundations of social and economic phenomena, which helps in the development of e...
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Abstract The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans (Guidelines) advises older adults to be as active as possible. Yet, despite the well documented benefits of physical a...
Climate and Culture
Climate and Culture
Climate is, presently, a heatedly discussed topic. Concerns about the environmental, economic, political and social consequences of climate change are of central interest in academ...
Ontology Alignment Techniques
Ontology Alignment Techniques
Sometimes the use of a single ontology is not sufficient to cover different vocabularies for the same domain, and it becomes necessary to use several ontologies in order to encompa...
Approach to developing a cluster ontology
Approach to developing a cluster ontology
A conceptual approach to developing an ontology for the "Clusters" subject area and forming corresponding development tools is presented. The cluster ontology is fundamental for ad...

Back to Top