BooK Review: The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions
By : Kuhn Thomas
(London, and United States , University of Chicago Press, 1962)
In his preface, Kuhn stated his concept of “paradigm” “is to urge a change in the perception and evaluation of familiar data” [1] . Hence, a paradigm is not merely a re-make of re-stating a model. It is similar to the concept of “Family resemblance” been proposed by Late-Wittgenstein[2].
To further expands the meaning of paradigm, Kuhn viewed a scientific revolution would change the historical perspective of the community that experience it[3] .When he used the community; he refers to the scholastic member that involved in the scientific research that collaborated with the academia.
However , such well trained community were often too accustomed the rigorous training from their previous institution . Their persistent belief of their set of training can become a resistance for them to observe the phenomenon which is not accountable in their known theory.
Kuhn cited the case of the discovery of electromagnetism to support his claim. The precursor scientist has no mean to explain the strange electrical attraction and compulsion by Newtonian mechanics. Moreover, they tend to ignore the phenomenon which is non-complied to the Newtonian explanatory.
When someone proposed a novel way to look at this phenomenon, he is usually challenged by the pre-existing member of scholastic community. The human nature resist to accept the new theoretical explanation . What they (the scholastic community) have taken for granted as abnormality of the usual experience is been redefined[4] . The resistance that faced by the new discovery to challenge the old view will causes revolution.
However, Kuhn’s revolution is not limited to a novel idea that challenged the previous theory. He refers it as a new perspective of observe the pre-existing abnormality and conform them into explainable theory . It is by regulating the abnormality into the new theory , resulting the perspective changes to the pre-existing scientific facts , that causes the conflict of the perspectives . In orders to make people accept of the new
perspective , a “revolution” [5] that change the meaning of the established concept will take place as the scholastic community struggled to accept the alternative perspective. For example in page 115, when Galileo used his newly made telescope to observe , he exclaimed “I used to see a plant , now I see satellite” . Such claim can only be made after the advancement of astronomical instrument.
When I was reading anthropological theory , I realised the humanity science do face the similar “ revolution” as Anthropologist proposed new theory to explain the phenomenon. For example, the lineage theory been discussed in last week . The anthropologist enlarged the study of kinship by expanded them beyond the member formed by sanguinity. These also causes the anthropologist challenged the norm of what they previously observed.
Nevertheless , I have also seen how anthropologist creating their own theory , not to overthrown the previous , but to find connection of pre existing theory . For example, Jeans Caramoff ‘s resistance theory is a combination of Weber’s charismatic community and Gluckman’s concept of Liminal state . Perhaps in the humanity science , we do not face the drastic paradigm shift as much as the scientific community ?
[1] Vol II no.2 Preface Viii , The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions , University of Chicago Press, 1962
[2] Page 44, The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions , University of Chicago Press, 1962
[3] Ibid , Preface
[4] Ibid , ii Normal Science
[5] p102, The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions , University of Chicago Press, 1962
沒有留言:
張貼留言