Kuhn and Scientific Revolution

Question 1

Briefly explain the following concepts, according to Thomas Kuhn: (1) Paradigm; (2) Normal Science; (3) Crisis Science; (4) Paradigm Shift.

Answer 1

-Paradigm viewed in two different ways: broad sense and narrow sense.
-In the broad sense, a paradigm is a package of broad ideas of what nature is and how to approach science.

-In the narrow sense, a paradigm works within a very specific field of science.
-Working with paradigm in the narrow sense, science starts in the pre-paradigm stage, which is when scientists are doing something new but don’t know they’re making some revolutionary changes. Their claims are not quite organized or justified, and it looks odd to science at the time. These scientists are dreamers. Then, science finds a paradigm to work within using the dreamers as exemplars or models.
v
-Normal science, which is when dreamers follow models/exemplars and they start working together to form a scientific community, scientific institutions, and well organized social structures. Everyone works within the paradigm to solve puzzles and they do not question the fundamentals of their paradigm.

-When working with paradigms in the broader sense, these scientists may find questions that resist solutions. This leads to an anomaly, which is a problem for which we have not found an answer yet, and it resists any solution. These anomalies become more prominent and the number of them increase, which leads to crisis science.
v
-Crisis science happens when the existing paradigm faces too many anomalies and scientists lose faith in the paradigm; it no longer inspires and guides scientists. Additionally, no alternative paradigm is available. This leads scientists to start questioning the fundamentals, this can lead to a paradigm shift.
v
-A paradigm shift occurs when scientists come up with an alternative paradigm that can solve the puzzles that resisted solutions within the old paradigm, and can also offer more solutions. This leads to a scientific revolution.

Question 2

Briefly discuss the following objections to Kuhn’s view on Science: (1) The problem of incommensurability; (2) The problem of relativism; (3) The theory-ladenness of observations.

Answer 2

Problem of incommensurability:
Two arguments:

1) Based on meaning
-cannot communicate between paradigms, because the meaning may be different even though the statement is the same.
-For example, paradigm 1 is in normal science and subscribes to the idea of Aristotelian motion, and paradigm 2 is in normal science and subscribes to the idea of Newtonian motion. Person A lives in paradigm 1, and person B lives in paradigm 2. If person A and person B meet, and look at a flower and say “the flower is in motion.” Person A is saying the flower’s potentiality is gradually turning into actuality while person B is saying the flower’s relation to time and space has been rearranged. The basic concept of motion is completely different. So the meaning is different even though they are saying the same thing.
-Therefore we cannot communicate between paradigms; there is no common ground.
-This argument of meaning is said to be too extreme though, because we can to an extent understand the other paradigms because translation is not impossible.

2) We cannot compare paradigms because they define the standards differently.
-It is like playing different sports which have different rules. What makes me a winner in basketball might make me a loser in soccer.
-For example, if I am a theologian in medieval times who is in the paradigm which believes god is infallible, wise, and omniscient, the bible is god’s word, and that human reason is limited/fallible. If you compare that with someone that lives in the 21st century, studying the structure of the universe, reason suggests the sun is the center of the solar system, but the bible suggests the geocentric view. Given your paradigm, the geocentric view is more convincing because god is considered infallible within your paradigm.
-Therefore, we cannot compare paradigms.

Problem of relativism:
-shows that there is no way to show which paradigm is better because Kuhn is committed to some sort of relativism.
-Goodness is relative, it depends on which paradigm you are located in. If you’re within paradigm 2, you automatically believe paradigm 2 is better.
-Therefore, there is no way to compare paradigms; you can’t say one is better than the other.

Problem of the theory-ladenness of observations:
-observation is not pure and carries theories within itself.
-An observation means one thing in one paradigm, but can mean something completely different in another.
-Therefore, reality is paradigm dependent, which doesn’t match reality of science.