Methodological Systematization of Fundamental Conceptions: Classification of Theories, Modes of Assessment, and Intertheoretical Relations

The article proposes a methodological scheme for the systematization of fundamental conceptions in the philosophy of science. The initial problem is the scattered character of the existing criteria for assessing theories: discussions of demarcation, explanatory power, reduction, translation, pluralism, objectivity, reproducibility, and testability are present in the literature as substantively rich, yet disconnected lines. The task of the paper is to gather them into a unified procedure of analysis that makes it possible to distinguish types of theoretical constructions, assign to them the relevant modes of testing, and determine the admissible statuses of intertheoretical relations. A classification of theories is proposed according to the range of their claims, including local process theories, theories of a domain, general structural conceptions, cosmological conceptions of the origin of the world, and ultimate first-foundational conceptions. In addition, a distinction is introduced between two axes of methodological assessment: the rank of theoretical claims and the stage of maturity of a theoretical construction. On this basis, conditions are formulated for legitimate intertheoretical inclusion, reduction, translation, and unification, and a weak status of the reclassification project is identified. For ultimate first-foundational conceptions, an intensified mode of assessment is proposed—binary testing—directed at testing the completeness of the stated explanatory claim. The novelty of the work consists in systematizing already existing lines of the philosophy of science into a unified, internally coherent procedure for comparing fundamental conceptions.