Thomas Kuhn and Scientific Paradigms
In his seminal work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn challenged the idea that science is a slow, steady accumulation of knowledge. Instead, he argued that science operates within conceptual frameworks called Paradigms.
What is a Paradigm?
A paradigm is more than just a theory; it is a whole “worldview” shared by a scientific community. It includes:
- Shared Beliefs: Universal assumptions about what the world is made of.
- Instruments and Methods: The tools and math considered legitimate for solving problems.
- Examples: “Exemplars” or standard ways of applying theory to solve puzzles.
When scientists work within a paradigm, they are not usually trying to falsify their theories (as Popper suggested). Instead, they are engaged in “Normal Science”.
Normal Science: Puzzle Solving
Kuhn described Normal Science as “puzzle solving.” During these periods, the paradigm is taken for granted. Scientists work to extend the paradigm’s reach, improve the accuracy of measurements, and solve localized problems.
If a result doesn’t fit the paradigm (an anomaly), the scientist usually assumes their calculation was wrong, or their equipment failed, rather than blaming the paradigm itself. Normal science is essentially dogmatic; it requires a deep commitment to the existing framework to function.
The Role of Anomalies
While normal science tries to ignore them, anomalies occasionally accumulate. When these anomalies can no longer be explained away or ignored, the scientific community enters a state of Crisis. This crisis is the precursor to a scientific revolution, where the old paradigm is eventually replaced by a new one.
Theory-Laden Observation
A critical part of Kuhn’s argument is that observation is theory-laden. This means we do not see the world “as it is”; we see it through the lens of our theories. A chemist and a physicist looking at the same bubble chamber might “see” two entirely different things based on their training and the paradigms they inhabit.