What is your opinion on The Structure of the Scientific Revolution? For thoughts on this article, please leave a message or contribute to participate in the discussion. For the original manuscripts sent by this WeChat public platform, rewards will be given according to the amount of reading, and the Hunan Criminal Rule of Law Research Association will also award the original articles and give different level rewards every year. Looking forward to your contributions!
Submission email: [email protected]
Author Introduction
About the author
Thomas S. Kuhn (1922-1996) was born in Cincinnati, USA. He graduated from Harvard University in 1947 and spent three years as a graduate student, focusing on the history of science, especially the history of physics theory. He received his Ph.D. in physics from Harvard University in 1949. In 1952, he taught history of science at universities such as Princeton. His major books and papers include: The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought (1957), The Structure of the Scientific Revolution (1962), Revisiting Paradigms (1969), Necessary Tension (1977), Blackbody Theory and Quantum Discontinuity (1978), etc. From 1968 to 1970, Kuhn served as president of the American Society for the History of Science, and later as a professor of science, technology and society at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and editor-in-chief of the journal Philosophy of Science.
The Structure of Scientific Revolution, Kuhn's masterpiece, hailed as a milestone in Western academia, is only over a hundred pages, but its influence extends far beyond the disciplinary boundaries of philosophy of science, and has a positive impact on all disciplines and even the social sciences, because it proposes a new model for the growth of scientific knowledge.
Guide
Guide
Since its publication in 1962, the book's influence quickly spread throughout the humanities and social sciences, becoming one of the most cited books, and Kuhn's name is associated with the concept of "paradigm." The concept of paradigm accurately captures the common feature of the human state of knowledge, that is, knowledge of facts is not always simply accumulated, and the perspective of viewing facts and the way of studying facts may also undergo fundamental changes.
The historical evolution of science not only has accumulation, but also has many interruptions and revolutions, science in different eras has different paradigms, and scientists also do research in completely different ways. Breaking away from established paradigms means changing certain habitual ideas and unquestioned principles, and this is the scientific revolution. Science has made progress by constantly changing paradigms and breaking the shackles of old frameworks.
Science is the condensation of the essence of human thought, and the scientific revolution is a leap forward of human thought, and understanding them is undoubtedly very important for the study of the history of ideas. Today, with the rapid development of science and technology, it is even more important to study the development mode of scientific knowledge and the law of knowledge updating. Contemporary Western research in this area is the first to recommend Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
Content Introduction
Introduction to the content
—、— a sign of scientific maturity
The so-called mature science generally has a systematic and comprehensive knowledge system, with mature textbooks for learning and use, which can clearly distinguish what is the knowledge that everyone has accepted and which is the problem to be explored. Immature sciences often fail to do this, either because they have not yet formed a systematic knowledge system, or they cannot effectively distinguish between accepted knowledge and problems to be explored, in these sciences, everything can be argued, and the basic problems of the discipline are also the frontier problems of research.
Kuhn points out that even sciences that are now recognized as mature have a history of moving from immaturity to maturity. The transformation of a discipline from immaturity to maturity is marked by the dissipation of a lot of debate and the establishment of basic consensus. Kuhn sums up the signs of scientific maturity with two characteristics: first, a certain theory, writing, or research achievement, which has attracted an unprecedented large number of staunch adherents, who no longer believe that the study of the same kind of phenomenon can be carried out in other ways; Second, these theories, writings, or research achievements can raise rich questions and direct followers' attention to the research work that solves them, rather than always dwelling on general debates about basic concepts, as was the case. A more succinct description of these two characteristics is the establishment of a paradigm. The paradigm Kuhn refers to are the theories, writings, and research achievements that resolve basic debates and form consensus. The hallmark of a science from immaturity to maturity is the formation of a paradigm that has been freed from the previous situation of confusion and inconsistency.
Second, the connotation of "paradigm"
Kuhn opposed the notion that scientific knowledge is cumulative, and advocated replacing it with the term "scientific revolution." According to his doctrine, scientific knowledge develops according to the following pattern: pre-science - conventional science - crisis - scientific revolution - new conventional science ... and so on. The so-called pre-science is the stage when the discipline has no systematic theory and there are different opinions. When the discipline has a systems theory, the discipline enters the stage of conventional science, so that people use the "paradigm" in the discipline to solve problems in theory and experiment. When there are more and more difficult problems that cannot be solved by the original paradigm, the crisis comes, the discipline through the scientific revolution, the old paradigm is decisively destroyed, the new paradigm is born, and the discipline develops in the direction of the new conventional science.
The word "paradigm" is derived from the Greek, originally containing the meaning of "common display", which is extended to patterns, models, paradigms, etc., and Kuhn used this term to denote the framework of certain ideas and methods in a major theoretical system in the development of science.
The paradigm is widely used in Kuhn's doctrine, but it is an uncertain category. Kuhn himself admits that he often substitutes paradigms for familiar ideas in his writings. Because paradigm is a central concept for understanding Kuhn's theory of the structure of the scientific revolution, which was achieved through a shift between old and new paradigms. In the preface to The Structure of the Scientific Revolution, he says that he is presenting the paradigm as a universally recognized scientific achievement, asking typical questions and answers for the scientific community for a period of time. He used the term to indicate that, in the actual activity of science, certain recognized paradigms—including laws, theories, applications, and systems of instrumentation—provided models for the emergence of a particular tradition of scientific research. Paradigms are understood here as theories and traditions that are commonly adhered to in the scientific research community.
In Kuhn's view, the paradigm is not a system of knowledge in a purely epistemological sense, but a social form of knowledge, that is, the beliefs and rules of behavior of a certain social group, so he often confuses epistemological problems with problems outside epistemology, and makes a simple analogy between scientific and political revolutions. There is no doubt that his idea of valuing the influence of social, historical, psychological and other factors on the cognitive process is desirable, but to draw a simple analogy between the scientific revolution and the political revolution is to simplify the complex process of human understanding of nature. For example, he argues that in the matter of paradigm selection, like a political revolution, the approval of the group concerned is the higher standard, and the approval of the group is based on the common beliefs and values of the members of the group. In this way, it is difficult to draw a line from the idealistic and pragmatic view of truth.
Executive producer: Zhang Yongjiang
Author: Chen Jia, 2022 graduate student majoring in criminal law at Xiangtan University Law School
Editor: Chen Jia
Responsible editor: Xiao Yuhan
Reviewed: Wu Xia
WeChat: Hunan Criminal Rule of Law Research Association
Weibo number: @湖南省刑事法治研究会
Today's headlines: Hunan Criminal Rule of Law Research Association