Preprint outlines a method to classify and map foundational scientific disciplines, suggesting clarifications in their boundaries.
This preprint presents a domain-test method for classifying foundational scientific disciplines. The method distinguishes foundational scientific domains from subdomains, methods, applications, interfaces, and administrative groupings by asking whether a candidate discipline has a distinct explanatory grain, a non-redundant elemental question, a characteristic explanatory task, durable boundary relations with neighboring fields, and sufficient generativity to support subordinate domains. Applying the method yields a current first-order map of nineteen candidate foundational scientific disciplines: physics, consciousness, mathematics, information science, computer science, chemistry, biology, ecology, Earth system science, astronomy and cosmology, neuroscience, psychology, cognitive science, linguistics, anthropology, sociology, economics, political science, and systems science. The paper also distinguishes overlap from containment, identifies excluded applied or methodological candidates, discusses boundary cases such as history and philosophy, and states conditions under which the proposed map should be revised. The contribution is intended as a challengeable inquiry architecture for making disciplinary boundaries explicit, comparable, and open to correction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
E BURTON (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: