Kuhn Discussion Starter

According to Kuhn, a scientific revolution is defined as a change of paradigms, i.e. a shift in the accepted standards that determine what types of questions, methods, expectations, and interpretations people make use of in their scientific pursuits. In Chapter X, Kuhn discusses how, while they do not literally change the world in which data is obtained, “the paradigm changes do cause scientists to see the world of their research-engagement differently” (p. 111). Scientific revolutions thus create “transformations of vision” that require “the scientist’s perception of his environment [to] be re-educated” (p. 112).

Throughout The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn is very deliberate in his choice of semantics, and I think that the notion of reeducation is particularly useful in clarifying his point. Here, Kuhn talks about how scientists and students, following scientific revolution, denounce their commitment to the former paradigm as a mistake; their observations under the now-obsolete paradigm were things they had mistakenly thought to be one thing, but now, enlightened by the new paradigm, they see things as they truly are. The idea that progress, as it is considered in Chapter XIII, comes about through the adjustment of normal science demanded by the existence of anomalies under a given paradigm means that placing a value judgment on one paradigm—and by extension on observations made within the framework of that paradigm—is beside the point. The history and evolution of science lack a teleological end, so moving away from one paradigm when another is more compelling in explaining nature is useful for the sake of gaining a more detailed perception of nature, though it does so without any assumption that there will ever be a final paradigm that gives observations any semblance of ultimate truth.

The nonlinearity of the history and attainment of knowledge seems, to me, to be an optimistic note on which to end this course. Rather than demanding the condemnation of past experience, perception, and purposes as wrong when the paradigm within which they were framed concedes to its successor, a nonlinear, non-teleological conception of knowledge enables us to accept our past and present levels of understanding of nature as they exist within the frame of their respective paradigm. The reeducation one undergoes when confronted with anomalies and paradigm changes transforms our vision without erasing what was once there.