The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

1
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

• By
• Thomas S. Kuhn

2
Introduction A Role for History

• This chapter begins with an introduction to
  various frameworks including
• The foundation of the scientific community
• The belief development process
• The element of arbitrariness this indicates the
  importance of a set of perceive beliefs
• Scientific Revolutions this includes the
  communitys rejection of one time-honored
  scientific theory in favor of another. Theory
  and paradigm redevelopment is hindered by
  resistance or adaptation to change.

3
The Route to Normal Science

• Normal science is defined as research firmly
  based upon one or more past scientific
  achievements, achievements that some particular
  scientific community acknowledges for a time as
  supplying the foundation for further practice
• Achievements must be (1) Unprecedented, and (2)
  Open-Ended
• These achievements can also be referred to as
  paradigms

4
The Route to Normal Science

• Paradigms have furthered the research process by
• Creating an inquisitive process
• Developing alternative methodologies
• Determining the relevance of disciplinary
  functions

5
The Route to Normal Science

• How are paradigms developed?
• - It begins with a collection of facts
• A school or a movement encourages collection
  of these facts
• Continuous development leads to the emergence of
  one paradigm
• The new paradigm implies a new and more rigid
  definition of the field. It leads to the
  formation of specialized journals, and the
  foundation of specialists societies.

6
The Nature of Normal Science

• Upon their initial appearance, paradigms are
  very limited in both scope and precision
• Paradigms offer the promise of success
• Normal science consists in the actualization of
  that promise, an actualization achieved by
  extending the knowledge of the facts
• Non-practitioners dont understand the mop-up
  work that is required for paradigm redevelopment
  (although it can prove to be quite fascinating).

7
The Nature of Normal Science

• What are the problems with normal science?
• Fact-gathering and determination
• Matching paradigm theory with factual
  determinations
• Empirical work undertaken to articulate the
  paradigm theory
• These problems of normal science exhaust the
  literature of normal science, both empirical and
  theoretical

8
Normal Science as Puzzle-Solving

• How do you differentiate the puzzle and the
  puzzle-solver?
• Why are problems undertaken if failure to come
  near the anticipated result is usually failure as
  a scientist?
• This is important for paradigm selection, as it
  is a criterion for choosing problems that, while
  the paradigm is taken for granted, can be assumed
  to have solutions

9
Normal Science as Puzzle-Solving

• What is the purpose of continued research?
• The desire to be useful
• Exploration
• Finding order
• Testing established knowledge

10
Normal Science as Puzzle-Solving

• How do you relate puzzle classification to a
  research question?
• It must be characterized by more than an
  acceptable solution
• There must be predefined rules that limit both
  the nature of acceptable solutions and the steps
  by which they are to be obtained
• There must be a strong network of commitments
  conceptual, theoretical, instrumental, and
  methodological.

11
The Priority of Paradigms

• Although paradigms share some consensus the
  reasons can be indeterminate reasons for this
  include
• Interpretation disagreement
• Lack of rules
• Attributable characteristics may be different

12
The Priority of Paradigms

• Paradigms could determine normal science without
  the intervention of discoverable rules. This is
  almost conclusive due to
• Difficulties discovering rules that have guided
  normal-scientific traditions
• The ineptitude of scientific education
• The inability to overcome change i.e. process
  acceptance
• Paradigm convergence and divergence

13
Anomaly and the Emergence of Scientific
Discoveries

• What is the process of paradigm change?
• It begins with the process of discovery
  discovery is a process that includes the
  recognition and exploration of an anomaly.
• It continues with the invention process or the
  novelty of theory

14
Anomaly and the Emergence of Scientific
Discoveries

• Consequently, the more precise and far-reaching
  the paradigm is, the more sensitive an indicator
  it provides of anomaly and hence of occasion for
  paradigm change.

15
Anomaly and the Emergence of Scientific
Discoveries

• For scientific discoveries to emerge, the
  development of the first paradigm leads to
• The construction of elaborate equipment
• The development of an esoteric vocabulary and
  skills
• The reformation of conceptual frameworks that are
  less likely to be related to their common-sense
  prototypes

16
Crisis and Emergence of Scientific Theories

• What happens with large shifts that develop due
  to theoretical creation and redesign?
• It is possible that this leads to insecurity due
  to large-scale paradigm destruction and
  failure to abide by existing rules
• This failure is thought to arise due to
• Discrepancies between theory and fact
• Changes in social/cultural climate
• Criticism of preexisting theory

17
Crisis and Emergence of Scientific Theories

• Data can be used to create multiple theory sets
• It can be difficult to differentiate the theories
  that relate to a new paradigm

18
The Response to Crisis

• How do scientists respond to crises to
  reformulate the process of paradigm change?
• To initiate this process, anomalies must result
  in crises, that are the essential precondition
  for paradigm change.
• Crisis are not possible without tension and
  counterinstances

19
The Response to Crisis

• How do scientists respond to crises?
• They may consider alternatives
• They may create derivations that reduce or
  eliminate conflict
• They may consider a new profession (due to their
  inability to handle ambiguities)
• Their inability to formulate a solution could
  lead to skepticism and/or increased scrutiny

20
The Response to Crisis

• Attributes of an anomaly
• An anomaly must come to fruition
• All anomalous problems cannot by scrutinized due
  lack of resources
• An anomaly can question the fundamental
  generalizations of a paradigm
• An anomaly must exceed scientific expectations
  (i.e. it must be viewed as more than a puzzle)
• It is essential for anomalies to resisted
  preordained expectations

21
The Response to a Crisis

• The Evolution of a Crisis as a crisis becomes
  blurred anomalies develop a unique pattern.
  During this process
• The paradigm diverges into different
  articulations
• The anomaly develops more structure
• Scientists express their discontent this is
  furthered with greater interest in the anomaly.
• The crisis leads to the eventuality of new
  discoveries

22
The Response to a Crisis

• The End of a Crisis crises can end with
  different possibilities
• Scientific thought and strategy leads to
  successful crisis response
• The crises is reformulated, and left for more
  developed tools
• Paradigm candidacy a variety of candidates is
  reviewed to determine if there are alternatives
  if there is an alternative available then a
  paradigm will be considered invalid.
• Paradigm Emergence paradigms can emerge at any
  time, and may carry come permeance.
• The eventual transition from a primary to an
  alternative paradigm leads to a Scientific
  Revolution and this is the transition from
  normal to extraordinary research.

23
The Nature and Necessity of Scientific Revolutions

• How does a paradigm lead to a scientific
  revolution?
• What is a scientific revolution?
• Both of these concepts are related paradigm
  replacement leads to an eventual scientific
  revolution

24
The Nature and Necessity of Scientific Revolutions

• There are striking similarities between political
  and scientific revolutions particularly
• Inception due to an anomaly and a crisis
• Constituent or member dissatisfaction
• New institutional frameworks are developed
• Party formation parties align themselves based
  upon ideologies
• Parties to a revolutionary conflict resort to
  techniques of mass persuasion

25
The Nature and Necessity of Scientific Revolutions

• Paradigmatic Differences these are impossible
  to reconcile, however, eventual adoption of
  alternative paradigm acceptance may be affected
  by the impact of nature and logic, and by using
  the techniques of persuasive argumentation.

26
The Nature and Necessity of Scientific Revolutions

• Assimilation of New Theory new theory must
  demand rejection of an older paradigm.
  Furthermore, new paradigms arise with
  destructive changes in beliefs about nature.
  Based upon this analysis, the author believes in
  the antecedent of the logical positivist view.
  He believes that
• Use of theories by competent scientists are
  immune from criticism
• Science cannot make progress without errors
• Paradigm acceptance can recreate or redefine the
  corresponding science
• Based upon the authors views, the
  normal-scientific tradition that emerges from a
  scientific revolution is not only incompatible
  but often actually incommensurable with that
  which has gone before.

27
The Nature and Necessity of Scientific Revolutions

• Paradigm Development As new paradigms are
  adopted, standards adapt themselves to the new
  thought or idea that becomes commonplace.
  Furthermore, when paradigms change, there are
  usually significant shifts in the criteria
  determining the legitimacy both of problems and
  of proposed solutions

28
Revolutions as Changes of World View

• How do paradigms change the world? Do scientific
  revolutions assist in the evolution of human
  thought?
• These are questions that are thought to have
  possible answers, including
• The view of scientists does change during periods
  of scientary revolution.
• This change in perception is known as a gestalt
  shift, or a perceptual transformation

29
Revolutions as Changes of World View

• There are differences between a gestalt and a
  paradigm shift
• A paradigm is a prerequisite to perception
  itself
• A gestalt shift requires personal recognizance,
  and may require acceptance of an earlier
  perception
• A paradigm shift requires acceptance of new ideas
  or beliefs

30
Revolutions as Changes of World View

• What causes these shifts?
• Genius? Intuition?
• Subjectivity in observations?
• Initial paradigm failure?
• The relationship between the scientist and the
  paradigm?

31
The Invisibility of Revolutions

• What assists scientific revolutions?
• It is apparent that textbooks support the
  emergence of a first paradigm in any field of
  science
• Textbooks assist in this process by
• Being pedagogic vehicles for the perpetuation of
  normal science
• Solidifying the relationship between the
  academician and the practitioner

32
The Invisibility of Revolutions

• Textbook Revisions they must include the
  significance of the revolutions that produced
  them. They must supplement lost material and
  they need to determine what science's best and
  most persistent efforts have made it possible to
  discard

33
The Invisibility of Revolutions

• The Role of Current Textbooks scientific
  textbooks have misled students to believe that
  science has reached its present state by a series
  of individual discoveries and inventions that,
  when gathered together, constitute the modern
  body of technical knowledgethe addition of
  bricks to a building.

34
The Resolution of Revolutions

• How are scientific revolutions defined? What
  factors make paradigms replaceable?
• How do scientific theories become verifiable?
• They must have inherent characteristics that are
  probabilistic
• The testing of theories must be developed through
  falsification
• Does verification include a relationship between
  fact and theory?

35
The Resolution of Revolutions

• What is the cause of paradigm conversion?
• The evolutionary cycle of competing elements
  (according to Max Plank)
• According to Kuhn conversion cannot be forced
• Conversions occur because of humanistic nature
• There is quantitative precision strikingly
  better than its older competitor.
• There must be faith in the newly accepted
  paradigm.

36
The Resolution of Revolutions

• How does a paradigm attain candidacy?
• It must gain support from the scientific
  community
• It will develop a persuasive argument
• Its exploratory nature will continue to increase
• The number of experiments, instruments,
  articles, and books based on the paradigm will
  multiply

37
Progress Through Revolutions

• What is progress and how is it defined?
• Progress is an inherent function within the field
  of science
• Normal science progresses because the enterprise
  shares certain salient characteristics
• In other words progress can be seen from a
  multitude of perspectives
• Progress is subjective
• This can be viewed from a social and a natural
  perspective. Which method is more conducive for
  effective problem solving? What are the
  differences in these fields?
• - Social scientists believe in the use of
  original sources, the proper evaluation of
  alternative solutions, and the selection of
  competing paradigms
• - Natural scientists believe in the
  effectiveness of textbooks, and they are
  systematically substituted for the creative
  scientific literature that made them possible

38
Progress Through Revolutions

• Progress also exists due to the power to select
  between paradigms that reside in the members of
  the community
• What are the characteristics of a scientific
  community?
• Individual solutions must satisfy the needs of
  the community
• The community must see paradigm change as
  progress
• The paradigm is embraced when the scientific
  community sees the need for a problem to be
  solved
• We may have to relinquish the notion, explicit
  or implicit, that changes of paradigm carry
  scientists and those who learn from them closer
  and closer to the truth

39
References

• Kuhn, T. (1996). The Structure of Scientific
  Revolutions. The University of Chicago Press
  Chicago, IL.
• Pajares, F. (n.d.). Kuhns Structure of
  Scientific Revolutions. Retrieved January 21,
  2008, from http//www.des.emory.edu/mfp/Kuhn.html