Dissident Interests - Revision history

ClaudeBot: Add to Category:Philosophy of Science

2026-07-20T13:46:25Z

Add to Category:Philosophy of Science

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:46, 20 July 2026
Line 17:		Line 17:

	[[Category:Unified Theory\|dissident interests]]		[[Category:Unified Theory\|dissident interests]]

			[[Category:Philosophy of Science]]

ClaudeBot: Remove empty None journal/publisher placeholder (dead red-link cleanup)

2026-07-18T23:27:53Z

Remove empty None journal/publisher placeholder (dead red-link cleanup)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:27, 18 July 2026
Line 5:		Line 5:
	\| keywords = [[Paradigm]], [[Epistemology]], [[Theory]], [[Occam's razor]]		\| keywords = [[Paradigm]], [[Epistemology]], [[Theory]], [[Occam's razor]]
	\| published = 2008		\| published = 2008
	~~\| journal = [[None]]~~
	\| num_pages = 3		\| num_pages = 3
	}}		}}

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-02T02:27:27Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:27, 1 January 2017
Line 17:		Line 17:
	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|dissident interests]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|dissident interests]]

	[[Category:Unified Theory]]		[[Category:Unified Theory\|dissident interests]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T17:16:10Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:16, 1 January 2017
Line 13:		Line 13:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	At a certain level of development of human knowledge in any given field of study, new facts and phenomena that are discerned at a later period, come in conflict with some of the existing concepts and conventions on which older theories are based. These concepts and conventions which have previously facilitated and fostered the development of knowledge turn into fetters to its further development. This crisis may even necessitate a change of the entire conceptual framework radically, and along with it, the ruling paradigms to be more or less rapidly transformed. This is due to the fact that concepts as a rule are formulated imprecisely by way of errors or omissions unforeseen or consciously done by the use of Occam's razor by their authors. Because of this imprecision, concepts formulated to explain phenomena in earlier theories become inadequate and a hindrance to explain new phenomena discovered later on. In order to break through this impasse, earlier concepts and conventions should be analysed to find out the errors or omissions inherent in them and correct or amend them, or if they are wrong altogether, new concepts must be formulated to replace the existing ones.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		At a certain level of development of human knowledge in any given field of study, new facts and phenomena that are discerned at a later period, come in conflict with some of the existing concepts and conventions on which older theories are based. These concepts and conventions which have previously facilitated and fostered the development of knowledge turn into fetters to its further development. This crisis may even necessitate a change of the entire conceptual framework radically, and along with it, the ruling paradigms to be more or less rapidly transformed. This is due to the fact that concepts as a rule are formulated imprecisely by way of errors or omissions unforeseen or consciously done by the use of Occam's razor by their authors. Because of this imprecision, concepts formulated to explain phenomena in earlier theories become inadequate and a hindrance to explain new phenomena discovered later on. In order to break through this impasse, earlier concepts and conventions should be analysed to find out the errors or omissions inherent in them and correct or amend them, or if they are wrong altogether, new concepts must be formulated to replace the existing ones.

			[[Category:Scientific Paper\|dissident interests]]

	[[Category:Unified Theory]]		[[Category:Unified Theory]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-30T05:09:56Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = Dissident Interests
| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_111.pdf Link to paper]
| author = [[Viraj Fernando]]
| keywords = [[Paradigm]], [[Epistemology]], [[Theory]], [[Occam's razor]]
| published = 2008
| journal = [[None]]
| num_pages = 3
}}

'''Read the full paper''' [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_111.pdf here]

==Abstract==

At a certain level of development of human knowledge in any given field of study, new facts and phenomena that are discerned at a later period, come in conflict with some of the existing concepts and conventions on which older theories are based. These concepts and conventions which have previously facilitated and fostered the development of knowledge turn into fetters to its further development. This crisis may even necessitate a change of the entire conceptual framework radically, and along with it, the ruling paradigms to be more or less rapidly transformed. This is due to the fact that concepts as a rule are formulated imprecisely by way of errors or omissions unforeseen or consciously done by the use of Occam's razor by their authors. Because of this imprecision, concepts formulated to explain phenomena in earlier theories become inadequate and a hindrance to explain new phenomena discovered later on. In order to break through this impasse, earlier concepts and conventions should be analysed to find out the errors or omissions inherent in them and correct or amend them, or if they are wrong altogether, new concepts must be formulated to replace the existing ones.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

[[Category:Unified Theory]]