Up@dawn 2.0

Monday, October 9, 2017

POS-ch5

Posted for Sarah Willis

In chapter 4 of Philosophy of Science, Okasha focused heavily on the philosopher Thomas Kuhn, an American philosopher, historian and physicist, who’s ideas shook the very structure of science and knowledge. With ideas, such as paradigm shifts (see insert below) and incommensurability, Kuhn managed to cause a complete overhaul across the entire structure of human culture by not only challenging the way science and knowledge progress, but argued that its influence reached all throughout human kind to shape our worldview.

Image result for wittgenstein kuhn duck-rabbit

Kuhn used the duck-rabbit optical illusion, made famous by Wittgenstein, to demonstrate the way in which a paradigm shift could cause one to see the same information in an entirely different way. On page 81, Okasha defines a paradigm as Kuhn explains in the context of philosophy of science as, “an entire scientific outlook- a constellations of shared assumptions, beliefs, and values that unite a scientific community and allow normal science to take place.” There are periods of normal science, where scientists are diligently working to make sense of it all but adhering to the currently believed paradigm. However, anomalies are bound to pop up. Some may be ignored, some explained, but if there starts to be a noticeable amount of similar anomalies, it draws attention. This causes a, “sense of crisis… Confidence in the existing paradigm breaks down, and the process of normal science temporarily grinds to a halt.” (p. 82), thus the beginning of a ‘revolutionary science.’ Kuhn often gets a bad rep concerning his explanation of what takes place during the normal science phase. Many read his position to be one of arrogance, insinuating nothing really important or worth noting happens during these times. Scientists are merely glorified puzzle makers taking pieces they all ready have and placing them in the right order, with no original or worldview changing occurrences. I however did not read Kuhn to mean it in that sense. He was simply comparing and contrasting the difference between a time of normal science and the start and progression of a scientific revolution. I was incredibly intrigued by this chapter and am hoping to dive into Kuhn’s work.

1 comment:

  1. I agree, Kuhn gets a bad rap - especially from people who haven't actually read him, and think (falsely) that he means to invalidate science as our most reliably self-correcting tool of knowledge. The duck-rabbit's message is stark: we do tend to see what we've been conditioned to see, and it takes a revolutionary scientific genius to show us how else to look.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.