Redefining Epistemic Stances

Epistemic stances play a foundational role in scientonomy’s explanatory framework, yet several of their currently accepted definitions fail to capture the concepts they are intended to explicate. This paper undertakes a systematic reassessment of epistemic stances, motivated by a series of conceptual ambiguities and inconsistencies that have emerged in recent theoretical and observational work. We begin by distinguishing epistemic stances understood as states from the transitions that initiate and terminate them, drawing on insights from formal ontology and related literatures. This distinction allows for a clearer formulation of scientonomic questions concerning the dynamics of scientific change. We then propose revised definitions of several core epistemic stances. In particular, we redefine theory acceptance in a way that permits suspension of judgment, multiple accepted answers, and theories answering multiple questions. We reconceptualize question acceptance as taking a question to be sound and introduce question answerability as a distinct epistemic stance. Norm employment is redefined as a dispositional state to act in accordance with a norm. Finally, we disambiguate norm rejection by differentiating transitions from norm acceptance to unacceptance and transitions from norm employment to unemployment; we suggest that the latter should be referred to as norm unemployment. We then outline corresponding revisions to scientonomic laws, theorems, and encyclopedia structure. Together, these revisions bring scientonomy’s explicit definitions of epistemic stances into closer alignment with our intuitive concepts and improve the coherence of our ontology.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientonomy Journal for the Science of Science
Published
2025-12-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.33137/js.v6i.46704
Primary Topic
Philosophy and History of Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Redefining Epistemic Stances

Kye Palider, Hakob Barseghyan, Jamie Shaw
Scientonomy Journal for the Science of Science
Philosophy and History of Science
article

Redefining Epistemic Stances

Kye Palider, Hakob Barseghyan, Jamie Shaw
article en

Abstract

Epistemic stances play a foundational role in scientonomy’s explanatory framework, yet several of their currently accepted definitions fail to capture the concepts they are intended to explicate. This paper undertakes a systematic reassessment of epistemic stances, motivated by a series of conceptual ambiguities and inconsistencies that have emerged in recent theoretical and observational work. We begin by distinguishing epistemic stances understood as states from the transitions that initiate and terminate them, drawing on insights from formal ontology and related literatures. This distinction allows for a clearer formulation of scientonomic questions concerning the dynamics of scientific change. We then propose revised definitions of several core epistemic stances. In particular, we redefine theory acceptance in a way that permits suspension of judgment, multiple accepted answers, and theories answering multiple questions. We reconceptualize question acceptance as taking a question to be sound and introduce question answerability as a distinct epistemic stance. Norm employment is redefined as a dispositional state to act in accordance with a norm. Finally, we disambiguate norm rejection by differentiating transitions from norm acceptance to unacceptance and transitions from norm employment to unemployment; we suggest that the latter should be referred to as norm unemployment. We then outline corresponding revisions to scientonomic laws, theorems, and encyclopedia structure. Together, these revisions bring scientonomy’s explicit definitions of epistemic stances into closer alignment with our intuitive concepts and improve the coherence of our ontology.

Scientonomy Journal for the Science of ScienceVol. 6
University of Toronto (CA), University of Victoria (CA), Institut d'Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques (FR), Victoria College (US)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Philosophy and History of Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Redefining Epistemic Stances — Kye Palider, Hakob Barseghyan, et al. · Scientonomy Journal for the Science of Science (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS