Review of 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions' on 'Goodreads'
5 stars
Life-changingly good. Easily my favorite book of the year. Changed the way I think in several ways.
English language
Published Jan. 7, 2012 by The University of Chicago Press.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962; second edition 1970; third edition 1996; fourth edition 2012) is a book about the history of science by the philosopher Thomas S. Kuhn. Its publication was a landmark event in the history, philosophy, and sociology of science. Kuhn challenged the then prevailing view of progress in science in which scientific progress was viewed as "development-by-accumulation" of accepted facts and theories. Kuhn argued for an episodic model in which periods of conceptual continuity where there is cumulative progress, which Kuhn referred to as periods of "normal science", were interrupted by periods of revolutionary science. The discovery of "anomalies" during revolutions in science leads to new paradigms. New paradigms then ask new questions of old data, move beyond the mere "puzzle-solving" of the previous paradigm, change the rules of the game and the "map" directing new research.For example, Kuhn's analysis of the Copernican Revolution emphasized that, …
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962; second edition 1970; third edition 1996; fourth edition 2012) is a book about the history of science by the philosopher Thomas S. Kuhn. Its publication was a landmark event in the history, philosophy, and sociology of science. Kuhn challenged the then prevailing view of progress in science in which scientific progress was viewed as "development-by-accumulation" of accepted facts and theories. Kuhn argued for an episodic model in which periods of conceptual continuity where there is cumulative progress, which Kuhn referred to as periods of "normal science", were interrupted by periods of revolutionary science. The discovery of "anomalies" during revolutions in science leads to new paradigms. New paradigms then ask new questions of old data, move beyond the mere "puzzle-solving" of the previous paradigm, change the rules of the game and the "map" directing new research.For example, Kuhn's analysis of the Copernican Revolution emphasized that, in its beginning, it did not offer more accurate predictions of celestial events, such as planetary positions, than the Ptolemaic system, but instead appealed to some practitioners based on a promise of better, simpler solutions that might be developed at some point in the future. Kuhn called the core concepts of an ascendant revolution its "paradigms" and thereby launched this word into widespread analogical use in the second half of the 20th century. Kuhn's insistence that a paradigm shift was a mélange of sociology, enthusiasm and scientific promise, but not a logically determinate procedure, caused an uproar in reaction to his work. Kuhn addressed concerns in the 1969 postscript to the second edition. For some commentators The Structure of Scientific Revolutions introduced a realistic humanism into the core of science, while for others the nobility of science was tarnished by Kuhn's introduction of an irrational element into the heart of its greatest achievements.
Life-changingly good. Easily my favorite book of the year. Changed the way I think in several ways.
I met this book two times in my life, once when I was about 17-18 and never actually bothered reading it. Even the idea and possibility of a non-cumulative science destroyed my hopes about any advancement in general in these fields. I felt betrayed by science and weak, vulnerable to subjective ideas and mere personalities of scientists. I think this is the first step on the path of getting rid of scientism.
Then second time I actually read this book, 6 years later, though I should have done so much earlier, because there is advancament, and Kuhn's paradigm view (or "interdisciplinary matrix" view) makes so much sense and the author has so many great examples from history of science that it hurts not to see the stages of some non-cumulative, but real development. You don't always need a set goal to arrive at, this book is an absolutely must read …
I met this book two times in my life, once when I was about 17-18 and never actually bothered reading it. Even the idea and possibility of a non-cumulative science destroyed my hopes about any advancement in general in these fields. I felt betrayed by science and weak, vulnerable to subjective ideas and mere personalities of scientists. I think this is the first step on the path of getting rid of scientism.
Then second time I actually read this book, 6 years later, though I should have done so much earlier, because there is advancament, and Kuhn's paradigm view (or "interdisciplinary matrix" view) makes so much sense and the author has so many great examples from history of science that it hurts not to see the stages of some non-cumulative, but real development. You don't always need a set goal to arrive at, this book is an absolutely must read to anyone interested in scientific ideas and their place in human history.
Apparently independent of any phenomenological studies, Kuhn manages to give an account of science and progress that also fits with the phenomena of being-in-the-world, to borrow a phrase from Heidegger. As such Kuhn not only advances our understanding of science but helps deconstruct scientism while preserving the knowledge gained through scientific exploration. This is really a "must read" for scientists and philosophers.
Excellent classic essay on how scientific progress is not cumulative, a series of additive discoveries as told retrospectively in textbooks, but due to destructive paradigm shifts resolving periods of crisis within a community. Enjoyable easy read.
Eigentlich fand ich es in der zweiten Hälfte redundant und schwer verständlich. Aber weil es sein könnte, dass das an meiner Denkfaulheit liegt, und weil die erste Hälfte sehr gut war, trotzdem vier Punkte.
Kuhn did science a great service by debunking the linear history of science — the story in which all of history’s scientists are slowly accumulating knowledge and abandoning superstition in a quest for today’s interpretation of reality, which is on a steady trajectory for Truth. Kuhn shows us that this story is a complete fiction based on a regular re-writing of history with every scientific revolution. According to Kuhn, new paradigms (if you’ve ever used the word “paradigm” it’s his fault) of data interpretation arise and become popular in a sort of punctuated evolution. He cautiously understates the epistomological consequences for science in this essay, but you can read between the lines and see your faith in science not shattered but certainly changed for the better.