[Scientific (& political)] Revolution

Thomas Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions is absolutely fascinating! Finally finished reading it all the way through after using as a source for a history of science research paper during Spring 2018 semester at school. I definitely plan to consult it as a reference text in the future and continue usage of it during a conference presentation that I hope to give in March of next year.

Kuhn’s thesis is that a “paradigm” of “normal science” stands between stimuli and sensation, or perception in an effort to assist meaning-making and, ultimately, puzzle-solving.  Scientists are trained in the dominant paradigm of the time via textbooks which give only a cursory explanation of their field’s history and problem-solving. Puzzle-solving is a primary concern of practicing scientists who work on prescribed puzzles which their similarly trained colleagues also work on; thus, a shared language is developed. Occasionally, however, the dominant paradigm is unable to efficiently solve problems and conditions develop such that a revolution occurs in which a new paradigm comes into play.

I am very interested in the history of science and found the book, including the author’s PostScript about 7 years after original publication, to be incredible. There is an analogy drawn at one point to political revolutions, which is interesting from a sociological standpoint. Also, the description of science communities and training was very enlightening to this definite non-scientist [except for the aspect of history as a science].