Kuhn basically says a shift in normal science "subverts the existing tradition of scientific practice." In relation to previous election cycles, one could consider this one to be an anomaly. Trump, who was not a politician, managed to infiltrate the Republican party, bring some of America’s darkest beliefs to light, and win a presidency when nobody expected him to. New paradigms also require the reconstruction of prior assumptions and reevaluation of prior facts. This new presidency has definitely made us question what has happened that has allowed an orange TV personality to rule a nation. He has appealed to the uneducated with his charisma, vague promises, and false claims, and as a result of his win we are only just realizing many of the larger issues that plague the US because he is only just vocalizing them.
Trump’s claim to the presidency is similar to that of Reagan's. Both were dismissed as serious candidates, both were TV personalities who “told it like it is,” and both want to “make America great again.” Reagan was a successor to a democrat, and I think any shift in the leading parties can bring many issues to light and cause new paradigms to be constructed.
I think Katherine makes a good point, and in the manner Khun describes, the 2016 election may signal a shift in standards and accepted practices. Although there are some similarities between Reagan and Trump's backgrounds as TV personalities, Trump had no political or civil/military service experience whereas Reagan did have previous political experience. Trump's election may open the door for public figures with non-traditional backgrounds or no previous political experience to assume positions in government. For example, Silicon Valley executive Peter Thiel has already expressed interest in sunning for California governor.
ReplyDeleteKuhn’s notion of the paradigm shift insists that the new paradigm surpasses the previous one and he claims the reason for the shift is a developing incompatibility between the two ways of thinking. While I certainly agree that Trump’s presidential run will set a precedent for other non-political candidates, I don’t think their will be a shift where it is the norm for people in powerful political positions to have no political experience (or even the possibility that people might view political experience as a negative), thus in this respect I don’t think a paradigm shift is plausible.
ReplyDeleteI agree with George here. While Trump did win the presidency without any sort of political background, if we think back to the presidencial race, Republican candidate Ben Carson who also did not have a political background was scoffed at for running in the race. While I'm sure that the reactions to Carson were heavily influenced by him being black, I also think that he's testament to the argument that there has not been an actual paradigm shift in the United States. I also believe that candidates running after the Trump presidency with little political background will be treated similarly to Carson. Secondly, even during the Trump presidency, we as a people still respect political figures with large amounts of experience.
ReplyDelete