The Structure of Scientific Revolutions - Kuhn's Opinion On Scientific Progress

Kuhn's Opinion On Scientific Progress

The first edition of SSR ended with a chapter entitled "Progress through Revolutions", in which Kuhn spelled out his views on the nature of scientific progress. Since he considered problem solving to be a central element of science, Kuhn saw that for a new candidate for paradigm to be accepted by a scientific community, "First, the new candidate must seem to resolve some outstanding and generally recognized problem that can be met in no other way. Second, the new paradigm must promise to preserve a relatively large part of the concrete problem solving activity that has accrued to science through its predecessors." And overall Kuhn maintained that the new paradigm must also solve more problems than its predecessor, which therefore entailed that the number of newly solved problems must be greater than those solved in the old paradigm.

In the second edition of SSR, Kuhn added a postscript in which he elaborated his ideas on the nature of scientific progress. He described a thought experiment involving an observer who has the opportunity to inspect an assortment of theories, each corresponding to a single stage in a succession of theories. What if the observer is presented with these theories without any explicit indication of their chronological order? Kuhn anticipates that it will be possible to reconstruct their chronology on the basis of the theories' scope and content, because the more recent a theory is, the better it will be as an instrument for solving the kinds of puzzle that scientists aim to solve. Kuhn remarked: "That is not a relativist's position, and it displays the sense in which I am a convinced believer in scientific progress."

Read more about this topic:  The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions

Famous quotes containing the words kuhn, opinion, scientific and/or progress:

    In a sense that I am unable to explicate further, the proponents of competing paradigms practice their trades in different worlds.
    —Thomas S. Kuhn (1922)

    If in the opinion of the Tsars authors were to be the servants of the state, in the opinion of the radical critics writers were to be the servants of the masses. The two lines of thought were bound to meet and join forces when at last, in our times, a new kind of regime the synthesis of a Hegelian triad, combined the idea of the masses with the idea of the state.
    Vladimir Nabokov (1899–1977)

    If a man is a good lawyer, a good physician, a good engineer ... he may be a fool in every other capacity. But no deficiency or mistake of judgment is forgiven to a woman ... and should she fail anywhere, if she has any scientific attainment, or artistic faculty, instead of standing her interest as an excuse, it is censured as an aggravation and offence.
    E.P.P., U.S. women’s magazine contributor. The Una, p. 28 ( February 1855)

    “... A nation has to take its natural course
    Of Progress round and round in circles
    From King to Mob to King to Mob to King
    Until the eddy of it eddies out.”
    Robert Frost (1874–1963)