]> 2026-04-17T20:45:18+00:00 Claim 0 en 2022-11-23T18:59:23Z 2459907.2912384 Claim 0 i agree it's not universal! my feeling is that [[Claim]]: a statement (claim or evidence) might be the more universal element: - empirical work also consists of statements about the world (this is less controversial) - design/technological innovation rests in part on claims about a) what is needed in the world, what is hard to do, constraints, and b) what is needed to succeed: examples here: https://deepscienceventures.com/content/the-outcomes-graph-2 (h/t <@559775193242009610>) - theories often consist of systems of core claims (e.g., in models like what <@824740026575355906> and <@734802666441408532> are working with, where we can think of the claims as subgraphs of the overall knowledge graph) see, e.g., [[Evidence]] from this review of models of scientific knowledge https://publish.obsidian.md/joelchan-notes/discourse-graph/evidence/EVD+-+Four+positivist+epistemological+models+from+philosophy+of+science%2C+including+Popper%2C+emphasiz...+statements+as+a+core+component+of+scientific+knowledge+-+%40harsDesigningScientificKnowledge2001 and [[Evidence]] convergence/contrasts across users of the [[Roam Discourse Graph extension]] in terms of building blocks: common thread across all was Evidence 0011-11-20T19:01:10Z 1725401.2924769 Claim#joelchan86-22-11-11 19:01:10 0 my examples are more the latter. there are also strong roots in this idea of [[Infrastructure]] in CSCW, studying lots of attempts to get scientists to adopt new infrastructure and why they... didn't work. one challenge is the [[Claim]] that "infrastructures often fail because of the inertia of the installed base" (existing software, workflows, norms, institutions, legal codes, etc.) one decent entry point [[Source]] on this: Information Infrastructures and the Challenge of the Installed Base 0013-11-20T03:34:58Z 1726131.6492824 Claim#joelchan86-22-11-13 03:34:58 0 [[claim]] claims and questions dominate in natural conversation; the imbalance of sources & evidence is quite stark. This aligns with my mental model of *conversational charity*, where we assume our interlocutors *could* ground their statements in evidence if pressed, but skip this step in the interest of time. 0023-11-20T18:59:16Z 1729784.2911574 Claim#Wutbot-22-11-23 18:59:16 Has Topic 102 en Has Topic