Structure of Scientific Revolutions, II

1
Structure of Scientific Revolutions, II

• October 20, 2008

2
Normal Science

• mopping-up operations are what engage most
  scientists throughout their careers. that
  enterprise normal science seems an attempt to
  force nature into the preformed and relatively
  inflexible box that the paradigm suppliesthose
  phenomena that will not fit the box are often
  not seen at all. Nor do scientists normally aim
  to invent new theories, and they are often
  intolerant of those invented by others.(24)

3
Normal Science

• Determination of significant facts.
• e.g., acidity of solutions.
• Matching of fact with theory.
• e.g., telescopic observations of planetary
  positions.
• Articulation of the theory.
• e.g., determination of the gravitational
  constant.

4
Chapter IV

• Perhaps the most striking feature of the normal
  research problems we have just encountered is how
  little they aim to produce major novelties,
  conceptual or phenomenal. Science does not
  aim at unexpected novelty. (35)
• - Positive publication bias.

5
Chapter IV

• Q Why do scientists take on research?
• A Though its outcome can be anticipated, often
  in detail so great that what remains to be known
  is itself uninteresting, the way to achieve that
  outcome remains very much in doubt. Bringing a
  normal research problem to a conclusion is
  achieving the anticipated in a new way, and it
  requires the solution of all sorts of complex
  instrumental, conceptual, and mathematical
  puzzles. (36)

6
Chapter IV
Normal, paradigm science consists of
puzzle-solving.
The challenge of cleverly solving the puzzle is
why scientists pursue research.
7
Puzzle-solving

• guarantees a solution.
• leads to success.
• is what the individual scientist does.
• is constrained by the paradigm.
• Newton example
• Phlogiston example
• Dark matter/MOND example

8
Scientific Rules

• Rules about what specific sorts of things exist,
  and what kinds of relations obtain.
• Rules about preferred sorts of instrumentation.
• Rules about what the world is like, generally.
• Highest-level rules.

Ontological Rules
Experimental Rules
Metaphysical Rules
Methodological Rules
9
Scientific Rules

• Normal science is a highly determined activity,
  but it need not be entirely determined by rules.
  (42)
• Normal science only partly determined by these
  rules.
• Normal science is not all there is to science.

10
Differences from Popper

• Popper scientists are creative and daring.
• Kuhn scientists are puzzle-solving addicts.
• Popper scientists are constantly open to new
  things.
• Kuhn scientists are close-minded in an important
  way.

11
Is the puzzle-solving feature of normal science
good?

• Kuhn Yes! For progress, we need to close-off
  areas of inquiry.
• Ex. Political disputes.

12
Critiques of Kuhn

• Only one paradigm per scientific field?
• Is commitment to a paradigm really the way that
  Kuhn describes?
• Is such strong commitment really a good thing? Is
  it necessary?