The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

Thomas S. Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions chronicles major turning points in scientific development. Notable names in this field include Einstein, Newton, Copernicus, and Lavoisier. See also
and
How revolutions came about

1. The community rejected the then honored scientific theory in favor of one incompatible with it (6)
2. Problem--solution: what presented itself as a problem and what admitted a s solution
3. The transformation factor in which both the scientific community and the world were forever transformed

Outline
Scientific revolutions can also emerged from not so revolutionary episodes (6-7) if they were resisted no matter how revolutionary. New inventors of theories challenge the status quo on many levels. A complete overhaul of theory and practice of theory that has long held. the cummulative effect of new inventions is science is not wihout price; it means re-evaluation, alteration of the familiar, and a shift of the network of theory hence the new discoveries are revolutionary (8).

Key terms: norma science as a puzzle-solving activity

The route to normal science.
What is normal science? it is research based on one or more past scientific achievements accalaimed (10)
Paradigms are classics of science that:

1. were unprecendented as achievements that attracted groups hitherto committed to a previous position
2. opn-ended for a new group to resolve

Paradigms combine law, theory and instrumentation (10).
How does a science develop before it becomes a paradigm?
It begins with a fundamental disagreement, for example, how electrical research began. So early fact gathering is crucial.

What makes a theory a paradigm?

• beat the comptetion--be better than the current
• need not explain all the facts

underlying--truth emerges more from error than does confusion (18)
Effects of a new paradigm:

• It eviscerates the status quo
• loses its members to the new movement
• ignores those who won't change
• Gives rise to specialized journals along with a new and more rigid defintion.

The nature of normal science
If a paradigm is a work that has been done, what follows therafter? A paradigm is an object; it calls for further rticulation (23) under strictre conditions (23). examples of paradigms (23). here is normal science in action: "normal scientific researc is directed to the articulation of pehnomena and theories supplied by the paradigm (24). What is normal/paradigmatic research cosnsits of scientific investigation:

1. class of facts that the paradigm shows reeal the nature of things
2. facts that compare with predictions frm the paradigm's theory
3. empirical work is invloved in articulating and solving problems that resulted in the paradigm

Articlualting a Paradigm

• serendipity as discussed by Bacon
• developing special apparatus, precision
• exploration (29)

Theoratical problems: So normal science consists of

1. determining significant facts
2. match the facts with theo theory
3. articulate the theory

Normal science as puzzle-solving method
Results-obtained in research help solidify the values of the paradigm. Knowing the reults before hand does not take away from the hows--puzzle--solving--> therein lies the challenge
What are puzzles?

• Problems that have solutions
• stated in conceptual terms
• problems must have rules that limit the nature of acceptable solutions and the steps to obtain them (38)

It calls for commitment to conceptual/instrumental; theoretical/methodological is how normal science is related to solving puzzles. Paradigms can guide research even in the absence of rules (42).

Priority Paradigms
Careful examination involves isolating the in-thing and examining the rules that govern "direct inspection of paradigms " (44) common attributes--resemblances (45). Scientists work from establishing models; neither questions nor answers are relevant to scientists. paradigms determine normal science without rules.

• rules are difficult to discover
• theories come with applications
• paradigms guide research by direct modeling as though abstracting ideas (47). paradigms need not be applied to a very broad scientific group (49).

Anomaly and the structure of scientific discoveries
Normal science is cumulative; successful in its aim, extension of scope, and precision of scientific knowledge (52). Novelties are not the goal of normal science; they are only stumbled upon.

• Discovery and invention became aware of anomaly
• explore the anomaly
• adjust the theory so there is no anomaly when X then Y that becomes scientific fact (53)
• Fact/theory discovery involves recognizing that something is and what it is (55).
  

Discovery involves an extended process sometimes discovery through accident (x-rays); does assimilation of discovery lead to paradigm change. novelty emerges with difficulty (64) against the backdrop of resistance and expectations (64). Normal sciences while not connected to novelties cause them to come about.

Crisis and the emergence of scientific theories (66)
fact: there are no categorical nor permanent distinctions between fact and theory and discovery and inventions; e.g the discovery of oxygen is sees as discovery (by Priestley) and Oxygen as invention (by Lavoisier).
When existing rules fail, it becomes fertile ground for new ones to develop..
case: astronomical system; Joseph Black--Co2; phlogiston theory (70) was the basis of theory research that resulted in "proliferation of numerous versions of the theory indicating a crisis. Alternate theories can account for one source of data. they work with existing theories until unable then they are retooled (76).

The response to crisis
Crises are necessary conditions for the emergence of new novel theories (77). How do scientists respond to the existence of crises? they never renounce the current paradigm and do not treat anomalies as counter.
rejecting the current paradigm is accepting the new after comparisons with each other and against the anomaly (77). paradigms that are the basis for research do not resolve all problems. If they do, they cease to be fodder and become instead tools like geometric optics (79).
Theory and fact have to come together. Falsification (80) was necessary in the search for confirmation. Einstein's relativity fixed Newton's motion of Mercury. Incremental data results when crises worsens stereotypes then paradigm shift happens (89).
Crises blur the paradigm and allow rules to loosen for normal research. both trigger research akin to the pre-paradigm days. Crises close in one of 3 ways:

• normal science proves able
• problem resists new approaches
• a new candidate for paradigm emerges

A new paradigm my emerge before a crisis has been recognized (86). random research can be produced by anomaly. Normal to extraordinary research results from:

• the proliferation of articulations
• the willingness to do anything
• the expression for explicit discontent
• the recourse to philosophy and debate over fundamentals (91

Nature of and necessary Scientific Revolutions
What are scientific revolutions?
what is their function in scientific development.
Scientific revolutions are non-developmental/cumulative episodes that see an older paradigm replaced by another either wholly or in part (92).
Why revolution?
An existing paradigm ceases to function adequately (92) malfunctioning can lead to revolutions based on the notion: what is the problem? what is the solutions?
No paradigm solves all inherent problems.
A change in paradigm is often a change in worldview (113...the Gestalt) The scientists may deduce differently from observing the same thing but that does not make that thing the same. Aristotle--constrained
Galileo--Pendulum swing stones (121)

Data are not unequivocally stable (121) but "interpretation is central to the enterprise that explores it (122) by articulating, not correcting it. Worldview comes about by making distinctions which leads to a search for an operational definition )13-135).

The Resolution of Revolutions (144)
What is the process of paradigm change? Individuals see things differently, focus on them are new to the field. The researcher solves puzzles using various alternative moves within the existing paradigm only when they fail is the paradigm subjected to test against a competing (emerging) one. Verification: is a theory probable in the light of possible relevant tests not verifiable.
verification too;--natural selection that seeks out the most viable among alternatives.
Karl Popper denies the existence of verification and prefers falsification, which theory fits the facts better(147)
Incommensurability of standards between the two schools of thought (Einstein--relativity; Copernicus earth rotates).
The transition between incommensurable/competing must occur at once
152-153 only after acceptance does a new paradigm cause dissent and questions no in h revolution into textbook where it is debated (157) resolution.

Does Kuhn's notion of paradigm change

Assumptions of traditional science as per Pratt

• Objective--the senses as non-filters; the mind and senses don't play games
• language as conduit
• linear and accumulative
• accurate record
• control of nature

Kuhn takes issue with the notion of "science-as-cumulation" (96) of knowledge that can be corrected by observation. What Kuhn says about objectivity:
pg 96 is he critiquing Pratt and Locke? Kuhn disputes cumulation, given the paradigmatic shifts that occur in revolutions "the normal-scientific tradition that emerges from a scientific revolution is not only incompatible but often actually incommensurable with that which has gone before" (103). Kuhn equates the paradigm to perception.