Abstract
Active and heterogeneous disciplines constantly spawn new theories and theoretical variants. By definition, each such offering is heterodox to the degree that its veracity would diminish accepted theories. Most often heterodox theories are dismissed out of hand for nonrational reasons, such that they just seem too bizarre. Most of the time, too, rational analysis supports such rejection. Of course, many important theories in science once seemed bizarre but later were accepted as evidence accumulated for them and against received views. But the lag between a premature rejection and ultimate acceptance is an inefficiency built into the theory evaluation process. Is there a way to reduce this inefficiency ? Through examining a heterodox sociological exemplar, the authors discuss the standards to which such theories should be held in order to deserve (1) hearings in their relevant disciplines, (2) serious attention, and (3) assignment of a high likelihood of being true
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.