Order:
  1. A Diagrammatic Notation for Visualizing Epistemic Entities and Relations.Kye Palider, Ameer Sarwar, Hakob Barseghyan, Paul Patton, Julia Da Silva, Torin Doppelt, Nichole Levesley, Jessica Rapson, Jamie Shaw, Yifang Zhang & Amna Zulfiqar - 2021 - Scientonomy 4:87–139.
    This paper presents a diagrammatic notation for visualizing epistemic entities and relations. The notation was created during the Visualizing Worldviews project funded by the University of Toronto’s Jackman Humanities Institute and has been further developed by the scholars participating in the university’s Research Opportunity Program. Since any systematic diagrammatic notation should be based on a solid ontology of the respective domain, we first outline the current state of the scientonomic ontology. We then proceed to providing diagrammatic tools for visualizing the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  96
    Ways of Integrating HPS: Top-down, Bottom-up, and Iterations.Kye Palider - 2021 - In Hakob Barseghyan, Jamie Shaw, Paul Edward Patton & Gregory Rupik (eds.), Scientonomy: The Challenges of Constructing a Theory of Scientific Change. Wilmington: Vernon Press. pp. 21-40.
    Philosophy of science and history of science have been unable to integrate in a meaningful fashion. The major difficulty has been the question of how the history of science can inform the philosophy of science. By making several distinctions to characterize the type of philosophy of science relevant for integrated HPS, I show how traditional approaches to integration failed. These include a top-down and a bottom-up philosophical approach to integrated HPS. I then present a more fruitful way of integrating the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3.  85
    Reasons in the Scientonomic Ontology.Kye Palider - 2019 - Scientonomy 3:15–31.
    The question of how we come to accept new theories is a central area of inquiry in scientonomic discourse. However, there has yet to be a formal discussion of the subjective reasons an agent may have for accepting theories. This paper explores these epistemic reasons and constructs a historically sensitive definition of reason. This formulation takes an abstractionist stance towards the ontology of reasons and makes use of a composite basing relation. The descriptive and normative components of reasons are fully (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark