1

ESSAY QUESTIONS
DISCUSS THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE OF ONE OF THE FOLLOWING
PHILOSOPHERS OR SCHOOL OF THOUGHT:

THOMAS KUHN
by
NORINAH MOHD ALI
CHA130026

Thomas S . Kuhn (1922- 1996)

B S in Physics from Harvard University

(1943)
MS and Ph. D in 1946 and 1949,
respectively

Kuhns Legacy:
Wrote and published The Structure of
Scientific Revolutions (1962).
Most cited academic books of all time.
Devised the ideas of Normal Science,
Paradigms and Paradigms Shift.
Influenced virtually all of philosophy of
science after him.

Normal- science
Paradigm
Anomaly and Crisis
Scientific revolution
Paradigm- shift
Incommensurability

Outline
I.
II.
III.
IV.

V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.

IX.
X.

Introduction
Normal science
Paradigms
Normal science as puzzle- solving
Anomaly
Crisis
Scientific Revolutions
Incommensurability
The resolution of revolutions
Summary

Introduction
Stages of Science

Prescience

Normal science

Scientific revolutions

Khuns focus
Need to understand how these modes
differ from each other and how they are
connected to each other.

What processes move scientists

from normal science to a revolution?

Normal Science
Normal science means research firmly based upon one or more past scientific

achievements, achievements that some particular scientific community

acknowledges for a time as supplying the foundations for its further practice

body of accepted
theory

In textbooks / famous classic

shape further
research because :

Achievements of these classics

Sufficiently unprecedented to attract
group of adherents away from competing
modes of scientific activity

observations
experiments

At the same time, they are

sufficiently open-ended to leave
all sorts of problems for the redefined
group of practitioners to follow

PARADIGMS

Paradigms
Narrow sense: a particular achievement which
suggests a way to investigate the world (e.g., an
experiment, a formula, etc.)
Broad sense: a package of ideas and methods which
make up a world view and a way of doing science

paradigms are vital in normal science.

Paradigms provide the framework

(shared set of assumptions)
for normal science,

Paradigms
In the absence of a paradigm or some candidate for paradigm, all of the
facts that could possibly pertain to the development of a given science
are likely to seem equally relevant. As a result, earlier fact gathering a
nearly random.
To be accepted as a paradigm, a theory must seem better than its
competitors, but it need not, and in fact never does, explain all the facts
with which it can be confronted.
When an individual scientist can take a paradigm for granted, he need
no longer, in this major works, attempt to build his field anew, starting
from first principles, and justifying the use of each concept introduced.
This is left to textbook authors.

Paradigms
Once a paradigm is established, both fact collection and theory
articulation become highly directed activities.
The new paradigm implies a new and more rigid definition of the field.
Those unwilling or unable to accommodate their work to it must proceed
in isolation or attach themselves to some other group.
Achievement of a paradigm guides a whole body of research. From this
point on, researches focus on more concrete and recondite problems,
and increasingly they report their results in articles addressed to fellow
scientists.

Paradigms
Paradigms help scientific communities to bound their discipline
in that they help the scientist to
1. create avenues of inquiry
2. formulate questions
3. select methods with which to examine questions
4. define areas of relevance

10

Normal Science as Puzzle Solving

Normal science aim little to produce
major novelties, conceptual or
phenomenal

In Normal Science, scientists work to

solve puzzles.
This puzzle solving is governed by
the scientists paradigm which not
only defines the question, but to a
large extent the answer as well.
Scientist restrict or 'tie their own
hands' through their shared norms of
the paradigm leaving them to 'fill in
the blanks' or work out the nearest
solution.

We know from the pic what the

solution should be -- our job is to
figure out how the pieces fit
together to get the right result.
As Kuhn says Everything but the
details are known in advance.
The Challenge is not to uncover
the unknown but to obtain the
known

11

Anomaly
Phenomena unexplainable by
existing paradigm
Puzzle requiring alternative solutions
Unanticipated outcomes derived
from theoretical studies can lead to
the perception of an anomaly and
the awareness of novelty.
Fundamental novelties of fact and
theory bring about paradigm change.

How does paradigm change come

about?
through discovery - novelty of fact
by invention novelty of theory.

Paradigm Change

...appears
only
against
the
background
provided
by
the
paradigm. The more precise and
far-reaching the paradigm is, the
more sensitive an indicator it
provides of the anomaly and hence
of an occasion for paradigm
change.

12

CRISIS
Crisis are the necessary
preconditions for the
emergence of novel
theories
Crisis is always implicit
in research because
every problem that
normal science sees as
a puzzle can be seen,
from another viewpoint

13

CRISIS
The decision to reject one paradigm is

Crisis simultaneously loosens the

always simultaneously the decision to

stereotype the stereotype and provides
accept another, and the judgment leading
the incremental data necessary for a
to that decision involves the comparison
fundamental paradigm shift
of both paradigms with nature and with
Almost always the men who achieve
each other
fundamental inventions of a new
There is no such thing as a research in
paradigm have been either very young or
the absence of any paradigm.
very new to the field whose paradigm
There is no such thing as a research
they change
without counter-instances
All crisis begin with blurring of a paradigm Symptoms of transition from normal to
and the consequent loosening of the
extraordinary science:
rules of normal research.
Proliferation of competing articulations
They end with:
Willingness to try anything
Normal science ultimately proves to be able

to handle the crisis provoking problem

Problem persists and scientists declare the
problem unsolvable, and set for future time
Lead to emergence of a new candidate for a
paradigm and battle over its acceptance

Expression of explicit discontent

Resource of philosophy
Debate over fundamentals

14

Scientific Revolutions
Old Paradigm replaced
either in whole or in part
(incompatible)
New assumptions
(paradigms/theories) require
the reconstruction of prior
assumptions and the
reevaluation of prior facts:
i.

changes some of the

field's foundational
theoretical
generalizations
ii. changes methods and
applications
iii. alters the rules

15

Scientific Revolutions
During scientific revolutions, scientists see new and different things when
looking with familiar instruments in places they have looked before.
Familiar objects are seen in a different light and joined by unfamiliar ones as well.

Scientists see new things when looking at old objects.

This difference in view resembles a gestalt shift, a perceptual transformation

what were ducks in the scientist's world before the revolution are rabbits
afterward

16

Incommensurability
Incommensurability happens when there is a difficulty in theory comparison.

Theories are incommensurable when they share no common measure.

Causes of incommensurability:
Disagreement about the list of problems that any
candidate paradigm can solve;

Within the new paradigm, old terms, concepts

and experiments fall into new relationships;
Proponents of competing paradigms practice
their trade in different worlds.

17

The resolution of revolutions

Any new interpretation of nature,

emerges first in the mind of one

individual or a few individuals.
The resolution of revolutions happen
under two circumstances:

Transitions between paradigms cant be

Intense concentration on crisis provoke

problem
Men are so young or new to the crisisridden field that practice has committed
them less deeply than most of their
contemporaries
In so far as he is engaged in normal

science, the research worker is a solver

of puzzles, not a tester of paradigms
Verification of the new paradigm happens
by comparing the ability of different
theories to explain the evidence at hand.
One such approach is probabilistic and
another is through falsification

made a step a time, but rather its a

switch. It may occur at once or not at all
Scientists cant always admit their error,
even when confronted with strict proof. A
generation is sometimes required to
effect change.
New paradigms succeed if it displays a
quantitative precision strikingly better
than the older competitor
The new theory is said to be neater, more
suitable and simpler than the old.
When alternate ways of science are
called for, then decision must be based
less on past achievement than on future
promise

18

In summary