My point is, there has been a lot of condemnation [based on ignorance and dogmatism] on the rating and ranking of FSK.
This OP points that a FSK is implicit in all fields of knowledge to ensure credibility and objectivity.
Here is the related discussion with AI to justify my claim:Scientific Objectivity
Objectivity is a value.
To call a thing objective implies that it has a certain importance to us and that we approve of it.
Objectivity comes in degrees.
Claims, methods and results can be more or less objective, and, other things being equal, the more objective, the better.
Using the term “objective” to describe something often carries a special rhetorical force with it.
The admiration of science among the general public and the authority science enjoys in public life stems to a large extent from the view that science is objective or at least more objective than other modes of inquiry.
Understanding scientific objectivity is therefore central to understanding the nature of science and the role it plays in society.
https://plato.stanford.edu/archivES/FAL ... jectivity/
VA to ChatGpt:
Scientific Objectivity & FSK
Is the concept of a Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK], i.e. the scientific FSK implied in this article:
Scientific Objectivity
https://plato.stanford.edu/archivES/FAL ... jectivity/
Also does it imply there are sub-scientific FSKs, e.g. natural-science-FSK, Social-Science-FSK, Speculative-Science-FSK and so on.
If so, explain how the topics within the above article explained the implicit Framework and System of Knowledge therein.
ChatGpt Explained
The article "Scientific Objectivity" from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy discusses the multifaceted nature of objectivity in science, encompassing aspects such as the objectivity of scientific methods, results, and the scientists themselves.
While the article does not explicitly use the term "Framework and System of Knowledge" (FSK), it implicitly addresses the structured methodologies and epistemic systems that underpin scientific inquiry.
Implied Framework and System of Knowledge in the Article:
Objectivity in Scientific Methods: The article emphasizes that scientific methods are designed to minimize personal biases and subjective influences, aiming for reproducibility and reliability. This reflects an underlying framework that guides how scientific investigations should be conducted to achieve objective knowledge.
Epistemic Virtues: The discussion on epistemic virtues, such as accuracy, consistency, and simplicity, highlights the system of values that scientists adhere to in the pursuit of knowledge. These virtues form a system that shapes the development and validation of scientific theories.
Role of Scientific Communities: The article notes that scientific objectivity is often maintained through communal practices, including peer review and consensus-building. This communal aspect indicates a structured system where knowledge is evaluated and validated collectively.
Sub-Scientific Frameworks and Systems of Knowledge:
The article implies the existence of specialized frameworks within the broader scientific enterprise, though it does not categorize them explicitly.
Natural Sciences: Disciplines like physics and chemistry operate within frameworks that emphasize empirical observation and experimental validation, striving for objectivity through quantifiable measurements.
Social Sciences: Fields such as sociology and psychology deal with complex human behaviors and societies, often requiring interpretative methods. The article discusses challenges in achieving objectivity in these areas due to the influence of social and cultural factors.
Speculative Sciences: While not directly addressed, the article's exploration of the limits of objectivity and the role of theoretical models suggests that more speculative scientific endeavors operate within different epistemic frameworks, where hypotheses may not yet be empirically testable.
Conclusion:
The "Scientific Objectivity" article implicitly acknowledges that science operates within various frameworks and systems of knowledge, each with its own methodologies and epistemic virtues aimed at achieving objectivity. These frameworks are tailored to the specific domains of inquiry, whether in natural sciences, social sciences, or more speculative fields, reflecting the diverse approaches to understanding the world objectively.