Thomas Kuhn: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

Loved that Kuhn was pals with John E. Mack, M.D. Can only imagine his reaction/input to the field today.

Terrific video for this right-brained parvenu.

Paz y luz, all.

Very well done! You are an excellent science video journalist.

Well done! Very clean explanations. I subscribed, and I'm commenting for that very reason. Thanks

Whenever I run into an author or idea I want elucidated, I come to this channel to see if there's a video on that topic.

Chapter 4: “Normal Science as Puzzle Making”
1. How does Kuhn explain the enthusiasm scientists show for finding solutions to problems for which the outcome has long been predicted? What does Kuhn thinks drives scientists in these instances?

- He compares normal science to solving a puzzle; the excitement lies not in the discovering of something new, and while it is true that some scientists pursue that, most scientists pursue normal science. What drives the them to continue on is the idea that they can only solve the puzzle if they are skillful enough.

2. In chapter 4, Kuhn’s extended puzzle metaphor adds a lot of complications to the common picture of scientists always driving to discover new things. What are some ways that Kuhn thinks working under a paradigm shapes what questions a scientist will think is worth spending time on, or what the community will consider an unscientific question to pursue?

- Within the metaphor of a puzzle, Kuhn writes about how puzzles have certain rules which lead to their completion. A jigsaw puzzle, for example, must be put together in a certain way to find “a solution.” Scientists focus on questions to which they can already guess the answer, and which add to the scope and precision of the paradigm from which they sprang.

Chapter 5, “The Priority of the Paradigm”
3. *According to Kuhn, which is easier for a historian of science, or scientists themselves: identification the paradigms of a community, or identifying the abstract rules (i.e. the full interpretation and rationalization of the paradigm) which govern the community? Why?

- Identification of paradigms of a community, as a paradigm is an accepted solution to a problem, whereas the rules which govern the community spring from an interpretation of the paradigms, over which scientists often disagree, sometimes even unknowingly.

4. How does Kuhn use Wittgenstein’s discussion of the concept of game to explain how scientists might be able to stay within the bounds of their particular normal science tradition without having a completely defined set of rules to guide them?

- Wittgenstein’s discussion of the concept of game tells us we understand what somebody means when they use the word game to describe a thing; not because there is a set of characteristics which apply to all games and only games, but because what a person is referring to as a game shares some family resemblance with things we have been taught to call “games.”

5. What are Kuhn’s four reasons for saying that paradigms do in fact determine normal science without having to be interpreted into fully rational rules? Explain each.

- 1. There is severe difficulty in determining what the governing rules are, as these rules will only share a family resemblance, which is no better than a paradigm.


- 2. The nature of learning science is that any theory must be accompanied by a concrete range of information. The ability to do concrete research, to see tangible results, is enough of a governing body without the derivation of rules.

- 3. Rules often crop up when a paradigm is felt to be insecure. However, the rules are unnecessary when the paradigm is agreed upon.

- 4. Whereas rules must apply to a broad number of scientific fields and govern them all, the same paradigms can be applied in multiple ways to numerous specializations without any rules at all, in which case a paradigm shift is not so incredibly catastrophic.

It's like watching mold grown. It blows up than slow and stenfrhan and increases in size against and so on before it rapidly dies out. We've reached a point where we may be assigning into a new paradym.

Excellent summary and explanation of Kuhn's landmark book. I just began reading his book a week ago and this is a very helpful review of the key points.

What is this animation!!!! I love it,, does anyone know?

Information monopoly victims

Very good... but what about Karl Marx?

Inspired me to look more closely at the history in my own field of medicine.

It's notable how SLOWLY you speak, and how GOOD that is for my understanding. (Native English speaker, here)

A good book.

2 words - Karl Popper 😂😂

Kuhn is Swiss name

This book must be renamed as The structure of the European scientific revolution. It has its limits. The book has not recognised the contribution of non-west in scientific progress. There are a lot of examples of paradigmatic shifts in the non-western world like in India or China.

kuhn sucks. his victories aren't scientific, they're political appeasments of every regressive hack currently practicing

Hayyy STS hahahahaha exam namin bukas shutang subject na tohh hahahaha

Another idle man that should be put to work doing real contribution to society.

This is one of the most influential books I've ever read.

Good video, but can I suggest you drop an epilepsy warning for around seven minute thirty mark - the flashing was quite intense.

HI SS31

Tang inang subject na STS na to nakakastress

Great video terrible clips

TO MY FIRST COUSIN LIANNE CRISELDA YU. MARQUEZ. I RESPECT YOU A LOT. I KNOW LOUIE LLUSTRISSIMO COURTED YOU LIANNE ❤️ TO MY FIRST COUSIN LIANNE CRISELDA YU. MARQUEZ. YOU CAN BE HAPPY WITH LOUIE LLUSTRISSIMO ♥️ I CARE FOR YOU LIANNE ❤️

I KNOW THOMAS KUHN BEFORE I VOLUNTEERED FOR FREE IN ZAMBOANGA CITY MEDICAL CENTER HOSPITAL BACK IN 2012

But, of course, we now know that Gravity is a pushing force, not pulling. Because the universe is constantly expanding. So, heavenly bodies are moving (pushing) away from each other.

Could you share me the power point of it, please?

Nice

Nice summary!

Have had the book for a while. Needed some motivation to get started. Found it!

What book are the quotes used taken from? if anybody can help please.

This is very interesting to me because I believe that everything can be boiled down to a dichotomy.

Génial penseur de l'évolution de la connaissance scientifique.

Ptolemy didn't provide useful info for navigation. The practical activity of navigation for long-distance trade for profit, drove the pursuit of more accurate knowledge about celestial bodies and their movement so as to provide info for navigation was the raison de etre driving the paradigm shift from Ptolemaic world the eventually Newtonian world. the real break-thru came with Kepler. Copernicus made the assertion, Galileo backed it up. So did Tycho Brahe in Denmark. But the new claims were about circular motion and the exact mesures of Brahe couldn't be reconciled with circles. Kepler retroduced the theory and the data, orr abducted the data and theory and landed on ellipitical movement. Then Newton came along and provided an parsimonious and efficient explanation for the elliptical movement, a new force of nature called gravity mediating between mass and distance and explaining the movement of objects. Notably, you can't see gravity itself. You can only see its effects. The generative mechanism is real but not directly observable. Neither Kuhn or Popper ever fully recognize this key part of the reality of how science work. This is especially true of the anti-science postmodern wankers like Bruno Latour, the ethnomethodologists and other reactionary fools. Now days Latour and some others are trying to softly backpedal and claim they weren't really being anti-science, because now it is clear that such anti-science chicanery is a rest stop on the road to fascism, and not some edgy rhizomatic anarchist Actant utopia of lilberation.

Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolution popularized an empiricist pragmatic approach to philosophy of science. C.S. Pierce was doing this earlier, but didn't put it together in a single volume with a history of science lit review on the front end as flashy decoration.

I have to read Kuhn's book by Thursday. Thank you very much for this informative, intelligent and informative video

share naman kayo ng reflection dyan. HAHAHAHAHA

pahingi naman ng mga answers sa mga nagmomodule diyan HAHAHA

do you have a transcript of this video?

I really enjoyed this video. Comprehensive summary and easy to understand.

بنية الثورات العلمية (توماس كون ).

لم يجد شذوذا و لا ظاهرة غريبة عندما أعلن كوبرنيك أن الأرض هي التي تدور حول الشمس و ليس الشمس هي التي تدور حول الأرض بل كانت هناك جملة تساؤلات تدور في ذهنه ، منها أن الجرم الصغير هو الذي يدور حول الجرم الأكبر و ليس الجرم الكبير هو من يدور حول الحرم الصغير ،النموذج الإرشادي هنا لا يعمل حسب مصطلحات توماس كون و معارضة غاليليو لفيزياء ارسطو كانت بسبب المشاهدات و الملاحظات التي تراكمت عند غاليليو ،النموذج الارشادي لم يعان من ازمة و العلم القياسي حتى تلك الفترة كانت يسير سيرا حسنا و ما يسمى بالشذوذ الذي ظهر و استعصى على الحل أتى بعد قرنين من إعلان نيوتن قوانين الحركة و الجاذبية العامة ،فنيوتن خطى الخطوة الأولى نحو القانون الأساسي و هو قانون الجاذبية العامة و أينشتاين لم يفعل شيئا آخر غير توسيع مفهوم الجاذبية عند نيوتن فاضاف على مفهوم نيوتن و لم يكتشف الجاذبية نفسها و الاكتشاف قد يعني تغيرا جذريا و قد لا يعني شيئا على الإطلاق ،فنظرية الجاذبية عند أرسطو حول العناصر الاثقل بل و العناصر الاخف فانطلق من التراب صعودا نحو النار مرورا بالماء و الهواء ،لم تحدث تحولا و بقيت نظريته تتنفس ألفي عام تماما كما بقي الإنسان يتنفس الهواء على الأرض دون بروز شذوذ بدعوللدهشة او يدعو للسؤال مجددا حول ماهية نظرية أرسطو الفيزيائية نفسها و سواء فيما يتعلق باكتشاف الأوكسجين بريسنلي و ابتكار الاوكسيجن لافوازبة او من ثم اكتشاف أشعة اكس او وعاء ليدن ،فالصدفة هنا تظهر و تختفي أمام انظار العلماء ،لا العلم القياسي و لا النموذج الإرشادي هما ما وجها أنظار العلماء او ايقظهم من النوم و لكن هي ظروف التجربة و عناد الصدفة هما ما دفع العلماء إلى التنبه و الاستيقاظ من صحوة الوقائع و إلى القفز نحو المستقبل ، الذي يفسر كل شيء هو الاستمرار و الحوار هو نهر الزمن الذي يجري و يجرف معه الماضي و الحاضر ليصب في بحر المستقبل حيث تتجمع تيارات و مذاهب و مدارس العلم من كل وجهة و من كل اتجاه ،حوار العلماء فيما بينهم و حوار العالم مع تجربته المتكررة و ادواته احيانا هو النبع الذي منه ينبلج نهر العلم و الذي اسمه هنا ايضا نهر الزمن ،الاستمرار هو الخيط او النسيج الذي يخيط منه العلم ثوبه ، يتبدل كلما تحاور العلماء مع الوافع و كلما تحاور العلماء مع بعضهم البعض و الظواهر التي تنشيء كانها شذوذ هي نتبجة الحوار و ليست ظواهر خارج اطار ما يسمى النموذج الإرشادي و العلم القياسي ليس علما قياسيا بقدر ما هو حركة و استمرار و حوار لا ينتهي ..
12/04/21