The Structure of Scientific Revolutions-Thomas S. Kuhn

(Ch. V to IX)

Anuj Vijay BhatiaFPRM 14

Institute of Rural Management Anand

A Role of History The Route to Normal Science The Nature of Normal Science Normal Science as Puzzle Solving

Till now we have seen..

Easy to determine Paradigms of a mature science

Shared paradigms does not imply shared rules.

Historians must compare paradigms Identify isolable elements Identify accepted rules and principles

The Priority of Paradigms

Search for rules : A source of deep frustration. What abstract characteristics make solutions

to problem permanent? Scientists disagree to the interpretations of

paradigm Existence of paradigm isn't existence of rules Scientist must know certain rules No set of characteristics is applicable to all

“Paradigms may be prior to, more binding, and more complete than any set of rules for research that could be unequivocally abstracted from them”-Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific

Revolutions

Paradigms can determine normal science without intervention of discoverable rules.

Reasons:1. Difficulty of Discovering Rules 2. The nature of Scientific Education3. Normal Science can proceed without rules 4. Shared Paradigm not same for all

Paradigm change is brought by anomaly Normal Science doesn’t aim at novelties New and unsuspected phenomenon

uncovered Fundamental novelties bring paradigm

change.

Anomaly and the Emergence of Scientific Discoveries

How changes in paradigm shift came about?1. Awareness of anomalies.2. Observational and conceptual recognition3. The consequent change of paradigm and

Resistance

Scientist see nature in different way New facts/anomalies does not always lead to

paradigm change Not all theories are paradigm theories Novelty emerges only with difficulty Novelties are manifested by resistance

Constructive and Destructive Changes Awareness of anomaly Professional Insecurity Failure of Rules

Discrepancy between theory and fact Changes in social/cultural climates Science is often “ridden by dogma”

Crisis and the Emergence of Scientific Theories

New theory after failure Novel theory is direct response to crisis Crisis is often surprising Multiple theoretical construction from same

data Not difficult to invent alternatives Resistance to alternatives if tools are useful Retooling is an extravagance Crisis provides opportunity to retool

Anomalies must result in crisis Pre-condition for paradigm change

Crisis is “essential tension” No research without counterinstances

Counterinstances creates tension and crisis Crisis is implicit in research

The Response to Crisis

Responses to Crisis1. Consider Alternatives2. Don’t treat anomalies as counterinstances3. Ad hoc modifications4. Leave the profession

Persistent and recognized anomaly does not induce crisis

Failure discredits scientists and not theory Carpenter blaming his tools

Science Education: Confirmation theory

An anomaly should be more than just an anomaly Anomalies are always there Cannot examine every anomaly It can question fundamental generalization of

paradigms It has practical implications More than just another puzzle Resistance

Crisis begins with blurring of paradigm Loosens rules for normal research

Anomaly gets recognition It gets attention too Scientist express discontent Competing articulations proliferate Try to resolve Often leads to new discoveries

Crisis closes in following ways:1. Normal Science solves the anomaly2. Anomaly is set aside again3. A new paradigm solves the anomaly:

Paradigm wars Invalid paradigm: Only if alternate candidate is

available Reconstruction of the field from new

fundamentals Emergence of new paradigms

Transition from former to alternate paradigm Changed view of the field, methods and goals Reorientation: Same data in different

framework New Paradigms with different universe of

discourse Transition to new paradigm : Scientific

Revolution From normal to extraordinary research

“….scientific revolutions are taken to be those non-cumulative developmental episodes in

which an older paradigm is replaced in whole or part by incompatible new one.”

-Kuhn, T. (1979). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. (Second ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

The Nature and Necessity of Scientific Revolutions

Scientific Revolution is Similar to Political Revolution Anomaly and Crisis Dissatisfaction with existing institutions Change in institutions Members become estranged and act eccentrically Reconstruction on new institutional framework Competing camps and parties Political recourse fails due to polarization Parties resort to mass persuasion