Normal science means the study based on the previous scientific knowledge that is learned through textbooks and formal education. These textbooks:<ul><li>Outline the main questions of a field and </li><li>Give methods to answer them. </li></ul> Scientists are happy to refer to past achievements without assuming they are necessarily correct. Therefore, science should be kept objective and open-ended.

The route of normal science 

Almost every field has certain established beliefs and paradigms. It means that nearly anything could be subject to a crisis. When a paradigm changes, almost the entire world changes with them. Scientists ask different questions, follow different rules and use different terms. Scientific revolutions only go one way and are irreversible. A scientist who now views the world through a Copernican paradigm can’t go back to Ptolemy.

Paradigm shifts change the world

Many people think that science progresses in a linear fashion, from ignorance to knowledge. If that were true, old ideas would never need to be overturned, only built upon.

Scientific progress is not linear

A paradigm will become messy as people try to expand their existing views outward into new, creative directions.  A crisis can end if:<ul><li>It is resolved within the existing and accepted paradigm.</li><li>The problem is categorically explained but without the technology necessary to test the ideas fully. The community postpone their inquires to the future when technology has progressed.</li><li>A new proponent arises that changes the paradigm. Competing views are fought out.</li></ul>

The response to crises

Paradigms are at the heart of normal science. A paradigm is a collection of interconnected beliefs we use to understand the world. But it is a limited process.  Scientific discoveries become paradigms when they are remarkable enough to attract a loyal following but still leave questions and unsolved problems for followers.

Paradigms and discoveries

Normal science is commonly held conclusions. When scientific revolutions occur, they can be invisible and hard to detect, but they are of crucial importance.  A person will only change their mind about a scientifically held belief from an old paradigm through repeated testing.

The nature of scientific revolutions

The scientific community cannot practise science without some set of accepted beliefs that form the foundation on how to practice science.  Normal science, the everyday work of scientists, is set on the assumption that the scientific community knows what the world is like. Its success comes from the community’s willingness to defend that assumption. But when it can no longer escape anomalies that overturn the tradition of scientific practice, then a scientific revolution will at last lead to a new set of commitments.

Scientific revolutions in a nutshell

One of the major functions of normal science is to solve anomalies. However, scientists often assure themselves there is a solution within the paradigm, and it must just be found. But this isn’t always the case.  Crises are a necessary precondition for the emergence of novel theories. Sometimes we have to discard scientific ideas that we find comfortable because the problems they tried to fix did not work.

Anomalies and crises

Scientific revolutions happen in a specific pattern:<ul><li>Normal science: Adding to existing knowledge through experiments and study.</li><li>Puzzle-solving: Finding and fixing discrepancies in science.</li><li>Paradigm: The perfect example of an idea which can be expanded into the framework.</li><li>Anomaly: Finding a discrepancy between the current paradigm and experimental results.</li><li>Crisis: The discrepancy can’t be resolved. Some scientists dismiss it, while others try to show the current paradigm is wrong.</li><li>Revolution: The old paradigm is overthrown by new information, and eventually, a new one takes its place.</li></ul>

The pattern of a scientific revolution

Because there is a paradigm doesn’t mean there is a set of rules that accompany it. Historians can generally find the paradigms of a given community, but finding the specific rules that the community followed is more difficult because:<ul><li>Scientists may follow the same paradigm yet disagree on how to interpret it. </li><li>Scientists have experience and knowledge they don’t communicate clearly or don’t realise others lack.</li></ul>

The priority of paradigm

This book singlehandedly changed the way most people think about the philosophy behind science and how transformation happens.

A good book may have the power to change the way we see the world, but a great book actually becomes part of our daily consciousness, pervading our thinking to the point that we take it for granted, and we forget how provocative and challenging its ideas once were—and still are. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is that kind of book. When it was first published in 1962, it was a landmark event in the history and philosophy of science. Fifty years later, it still has many lessons to teach. With The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn challenged long-standing linear notions of scientific progress, arguing that transformative ideas don’t arise from the day-to-day, gradual process of experimentation and data accumulation but that the revolutions in science, those breakthrough moments that disrupt accepted thinking and offer unanticipated ideas, occur outside of “normal science,” as he called it. Though Kuhn was writing when physics ruled the sciences, his ideas on how scientific revolutions bring order to the anomalies that amass over time in research experiments are still instructive in our biotech age. This new edition of Kuhn’s essential work in the history of science includes an insightful introduction by Ian Hacking, which clarifies terms popularized by Kuhn, including paradigm and incommensurability, and applies Kuhn’s ideas to the science of today. Usefully keyed to the separate sections of the book, Hacking’s introduction provides important background information as well as a contemporary context. Newly designed, with an expanded index, this edition will be eagerly welcomed by the next generation of readers seeking to understand the history of our perspectives on science.

books

Books

scienceandnature

Science & Nature

“One of the most influential books of the 20th century,” the landmark study in the history of science with a new introduction by philosopher Ian Hacking (Guardian, UK). First published in 1962, Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions ”reshaped our understanding of the scientific enterprise and human inquiry in general.” In it, he challenged long-standing assumptions about scientific progress, arguing that transformative ideas don’t arise from the gradual process of experimentation and data accumulation, but instead occur outside of “normal science.” Though Kuhn was writing when physics ruled the sciences, his ideas on how scientific revolutions bring order to the anomalies that amass over time in research experiments are still instructive in today’s biotech age (Science). This new edition of Kuhn’s essential work includes an insightful introduction by Ian Hacking, which clarifies terms popularized by Kuhn, including “paradigm” and “incommensurability,” and applies Kuhn’s ideas to the science of today. Usefully keyed to the separate sections of the book, Hacking’s introduction provides important background information as well as a contemporary context. This newly designed edition also includes an expanded and updated index.

Scientific progress is not linear

Similar ideas to Scientific progress is not linear

Progress is not linear

Remembered for your expository work

Not Trusting Scientific Knowledge