No man is an island. No scientist is an island. However clever a man may be, however deep his studies may be, one cannot do everything by himself. No one scientist can be a master of all disciplines and conduct all the research required in different fields to prove the paradigm. In The Structure of the Scientific Revolution, Thomas Kuhn describes how scientific research is done and what is required for scientific development.
The scientific community is influenced by multiple forces. Research is conducted to support or disprove theories in the scientific community. Apart from sociological aspects, they also affect the scientific community. Environmental politics, philosophical theories, and philanthropy all make up the scientific community. Does the scientific world have the idea that the world would be prone if it were not for the discovery of a new world? Would Newton have developed the theory of attraction and gravity if he had not been in the scientific community and in the common questions about the rotations of the planets?
Professor Kuhn investigates how scientific theories are developed. Such theories were then researched and analyzed and tested. He also discusses what happens to ignored and rejected opinions. Professor Kuhn describes how the scientific revolution initiates a new series of scientific research and displaces old paradigms long ago.
As a Marxist and post-modernist, Professor Kuhn created a revival in the religious community. His belief in the truth that is dictated by us and by society stands out throughout his book. Dean Geuras quotes Stan Grenz on what the postmodernism view is:
“Postmodernism} affirms that whatever we accept as truth and even the way we conceive of truth depend on the community in which we participate. . . . It is not absolute truth, but truth is relative to the community in which we participate.” (Gears)
Truth is dictated by the community we participate in and what we serve. For example, today the act of cannibalism is one of the great crimes against religious humanity. The very act of man remains violated by eating against the Scripture and the Koran expressly written. Hence the act of ethnic groups was considered and was more like a law in all basic societies. But this does not always happen, indigenous peoples in Brazil, Louisiana (such as the Nez Perez) and New Zealand all practiced cannibalism. These tribes considered it reverent if the body of the deceased was transported by the tribe. Was it wrong for these peoples to exercise cannibals? By the laws and religions dictated by their nations, n. Henceforth there was no absolute truth dictated by the biblical God. If they were, it would be otherwise than the law dictated to Christians. Their laws and rituals were dictated by the society they served, hence the modern view.
Thomas Kuhn will show readers how science has changed the laws of society over the centuries. Science made popular beliefs about the day. Sometimes science acted against them only with violent action. For if there were absolute truth before God, what good would science do? It would be a process of discovery when everything was already true. At no time do you want to find a person who is required or unknown. God reveals to his disciples the absolute truth that he wants them to know. In no time would modern science advance, and science and human knowledge would perish.
The parallelism between scientific discovery and the political world is incredible and creates a sense of questioning for Mr. Kuhn’s reader.
“Political revolutions inaugurated by a growing sense, often restricted to a segment of the political community, the existing institutions ceased to adequately meet the problems of the environment that it partially creates. href=”https://e-info.vn/tag/natural-ways”>nature to which he had preceded the paradigm (Kuhn).
As the reader can see, there is a very similar similarity between the scientific world of discovery and the political world. In much the same way that political revolutions took place in many countries based on desired changes and public observations, scientific revolutions of science took place based on the observations they made. It is not until these scientific discoveries are revolutionized by the phenomenon and the pattern of change is made.
Professor Kuhn comments in the volume on the Structure of the Scientific Revolution on the parallelism of scientific discovery and other fields.
“Insofar as the book depicts the scientific development of a succession of traditional periods that breaks the marked non-cumulative, his thesis is undoubtedly widely applicable. But they must be, for they have borrowed from other fields. Writers of literary matters; music, arts, political progress and many other human activities in the same just described his subjects for a long time (Kuhn).
Professor Kuhn saw new methods of discovery and showed them to the reader through his book. There is no doubt that Professor Kuhn was a Marxist, but his writing is very scientific and not inclined to his political views. There are few things that are a taboo subject in American culture, and they say you are a Marxist or a Communist top of taboo list. There are still many feelings in America from the Red Scare from the 1920s, through the McCarthy trails, and the Cold War and many will see that Professor Kuhn was a Marxist and never give it another chance. Professor Kuhn is a true hero humane Psyche who does not hide his political views in a society that would persecute him.
The Structure of the Scientific Revolution, although considered one of the most important works of modern history, has faced some criticism. Horus asserts; “It abolished, although it did not immediately overcome, the positivist interpretation of science as the foundation of scientific knowledge. It destroyed the philosophy of science as a powerful scholarly function.” Professor Kuhn opened the way for historians and anthropologists and his public to understand and understand the scientific input of evolution. There was no longer a discovery of science only of science, it was written for all to discover and enjoy. Everyone has benefited from reading this book and the paradigm theory of many areas, whether arts, literature, or politics.
Phenomena
Kuhn describes our understanding of natural phenomena as proceeding through a series of steps;
• Pre-paradigm stage – that stage when we can use the phenomenon, we cannot explain it.
• Paradigm stage of recognition – the first step to understand the phenomenon and the paradigm to understand the phenomenon.
• Paradigm reinforcement stage – The stage in which normal knowledge is needed to test the paradigm.
• Paradigm shift – To shift a paradigm based on a new discovery, thus creating a new set of questions and creating a new paradigm for learning.
Through observations of phenomena, scientists develop paradigms and begin their own sciences.
Paradigms
A paradigm is the fundamental concept upon which most scientific thought is based. Another type of scientific research is innovation, which we will discuss later. A paradigm is the consensus of a community of scientists about specific solutions. Scholars develop models based on their expertise and help to prove or disprove the paradigm. This research is called normal science.
There are two characteristics that make up the paradigm;
1. The paradigm had to be unusual in order to attract the scientific community.
2. It must be sufficiently open that several different groups of scientists can work on different problems within the same paradigm.
Basically, the role of a paradigm is to provide a structure through which a phenomenon can be understood. Without structure, scholars would have no family unit on which to base their observations.
The work that physicists do to prove a paradigm is considered by Professor Kuhn to be normal science. The solution to the main features of Kuhn’s theory of normal science is in the phenomenology of science. Kuhn argues that normal science is based on evidence or a paradigm, and that all studies are based on a paradigm.
Anomalies
It is not until an anomaly is found through the normal scientific research paradigm that a scientific discovery is made. “Anomalies to be found must be detected in the field of study” (Neyens). Until the observations of these anomalies, the paradigm is ignored as a false theory and attached to the paradigm, a new paradigm of studies begins. If scientists cannot continue to push the paradigm by observing anomalies, a crisis in the paradigm occurs. Either a new paradigm emerges and the old paradigm is thrown out, or scholars try to prove the old paradigm.
For scholars who are committed to the old paradigm, I do not attempt to refute it. Scientific research cannot produce anomalies or anomalies that they do not observe. Scholars who continue to hold onto the old paradigm tend to be disrespected and lose credibility in their fields.
Horus asserts that “Critics of Kuhn’s theory argued that the theory understood that no idea in the paradigm can ever be proven or disproved by science. This To a certain extent, scientists who do not reject the paradigm or observe their anomalies do not progress. However, all scientists are “puzzle solvers”, for it is important for scientists to remain in the paradigm and to contribute their part of the puzzle correctly.
The observation of an anomaly in the paradigm creates a crisis in the scientific community. The paradigm that they were working on is in crisis and the new paradigm is going to be wrong. “The new paradigm is incommensurable with the old paradigm.” To show how the scientific community is connected to the social community, Professor Kuhn shows how the success of the new paradigm is social, not intellectual.
“The new paradigm replaces the old paradigm, if science can be trained, if it can receive funding, if the results are more useful, for example, than the old paradigm. Thus, according to Kuhn, Science does not progress with the refutation of “wrong” theory and the accumulation of “true” facts. Progress is through a paradigm shift, that is, through the scientific revolution (Horus).
Revolution
It is not until the conclusions and observations of the normal discipline are drawn into the paradigm and anomalies are observed that a revolution takes place. Only when scientists can no longer support the original paradigm does a revolution arise. Professor Kuhn asserts that the scientific future will reflect the world more slowly than the public will relate to new things. The scientific community must wait for the social acceptance of the revolution to fund and study the new paradigm that has been created by the revolution.
There is also what is called an invisible roundness. This arises through a revolution and replaces the old paradigm. An example of a new production of text books. The old paradigm is gradually not printed in the newly published text and is gradually disappearing.
conclusion
I fully agree with all of Professor Kuhn’s observations. It doesn’t have to be a Marxist who shares his revolutionary beliefs. American It was just a revolution. But it was an innovation of the popular cause. Revolutions in all fields, in all walks of life. Only when people who support the original paradigm model can no longer support the paradigm thesis with the observations they see.
Professor Kuhn knew that his observations were being held in other fields of study. His views are as valid today in many fields of study as they were in the field of science in 1962. Thomas Kuhn crossed into new frontiers, creating a new paradigm in the study of science and sociology. Professor Kuhn’s name is associated not only with the likes of the great philosophers Kant, Nietzsche and Marx, but also with the great scientists Newton, Einstein and Copernicus.
Notes:
Franklin, James. (Unknown date) Thomas Kuhn’s irrationalism. New criterion on the line. Retrieved from http://www.newcriterion.com/achive/18/jun00/kuhn.html
Geuras, dean. (Unknown date). Richard Rorty and the Postmodern Rejection of Absolute Truth. Retrieved from http://www.leaderu.com/aip/docs/geuras.html
Horus, (unknown date). Thomas Kuhn’s Theory of Scientific Revolutions Retrieved from http://www.horuspublications.com/guide/cm106.html
Kuhn, Thomas. (1962, 1970, 1996). On the Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The third edition The University of Chicago Press.
Neyens, Kim & Gardner, Tracy. (Unknown date). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by T.S. Kiihn, Contempt an. Retrieved from http://carbon.cudenver.edu/stc-link/bkrvs/kuhn/overview.htm
Thomas, Aquinas. The Nature and Necessity of Scientific Revolutions and Tome: Revolutions and Relativism. Retrieved from http://www.marxists.org/references/subject/philosophy/works/us/kuhn.htm
Author unknown. Kuhn, Thomas (1922-1996). In the Encyclopaedia of Naevi. MIA: Encyclopedia of Marxism: The People’s Glossary.
Author unknown. (2003) Kuhn, Thomas S. In Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica
