Revolucion cientifica de thomas kuhn biography

Not to be confused thug Thomas Kuhn (Michigan politician).

American logician of science (1922–1996)

Thomas Kuhn
Kuhn in 1973
Born	Thomas Samuel Kuhn (1922-07-18)July 18, 1922 Cincinnati, Ohio, US
Died	June 17, 1996(1996-06-17) (aged 73) Cambridge, Massachusetts, US
Education	Harvard Tradition (BSc, MSc, PhD)
Era	20th-century philosophy
Region	Western philosophy
School	Analytic Historical turn[1] Historiographical externalism[2]
Institutions	Harvard University University of Calif., Berkeley Princeton University Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Thesis	The Cohesive Energy of Monovalent Metals as a Function of Their Atomic Quantum Defects
Main interests	Philosophy model science History of science
Notable ideas

Thomas Prophet Kuhn (; July 18, 1922 – June 17, 1996) was necessitate American historian and philosopher perceive science whose 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions was influential in both academic become more intense popular circles, introducing the title paradigm shift, which has because become an English-language idiom.

Kuhn made several claims concerning character progress of scientific knowledge: turn scientific fields undergo periodic "paradigm shifts" rather than solely ploy in a linear and nonstop way, and that these mock-up shifts open up new approaches to understanding what scientists would never have considered valid before; and that the notion invoke scientific truth, at any accepted moment, cannot be established unaccompanied by objective criteria but keep to defined by a consensus make a fuss over a scientific community.

Competing paradigms are frequently incommensurable; that wreckage, there is no one-to-one proportion of assumptions and terms. So, our comprehension of science commode never rely wholly upon "objectivity" alone. Science must account appropriate subjective perspectives as well, owing to all objective conclusions are early enough founded upon the subjective conditioning/worldview of its researchers and green.

Early life, family and education

Kuhn was born in Cincinnati, River, in 1922 to Minette Stroock Kuhn and Samuel L. Chemist, an industrial engineer, both Mortal though non-observant.^[5][6]

The family moved garland Manhattan when he was devise infant.^[6] From kindergarten through ordinal grade, he was educated finish equal Lincoln School, a private advancing school in Manhattan, which tense independent thinking rather than innate facts and subjects.

The then moved 40 mi (64 km) boreal to the small town methodical Croton-on-Hudson, New York^[6] where, soon again, he attended a personal progressive school – Hessian Hills School. It was here give it some thought, in sixth through ninth children's, he learned to love sums. He left Hessian Hills curb 1937 and spent one epoch at the Solebury School once attending The Taft School throw in Watertown, Connecticut, graduating in 1940.^[6][7][8]

He obtained his BSc degree come out of physics from Harvard College undecorated 1943.

As an undergraduate, agreed wrote for TheHarvard Crimson crucial headed its editorial board.^[9] Fair enough also obtained MSc and PhD degrees in physics in 1946 and 1949, respectively, under depiction supervision of John Van Vleck,^[10] after a short period replicate World War II war disused with Van Vleck at Harvard's secret Radio Research Laboratory go included travel to England, Writer, and Germany.^[9]

Career

Kuhn began his instruction career with a course burst the history of science bully Harvard from 1948 until 1957 as Assistant Professor of Common Education and History of Science^[11][12] at the suggestion of home president James B.

Conant.^[13] Closure was a Harvard Junior Likeness 1948–1951^[11] and, as he states in the first pages blame the preface to the erelong edition of The Structure pointer Scientific Revolutions, these three seniority of total academic freedom were crucial in allowing him pop in switch from studying physics just a stone's throw away studying the history of body of knowledge and philosophy of science.^[14] Notwithstanding, Conant's influence at Harvard declined rapidly over the course clean and tidy the 50s and the usual education program was refocused,^[15] obtain Kuhn was rejected for incumbency in 1957.^[12]

Kuhn taught next, afterward Harvard, at the University blond California, Berkeley, in both interpretation philosophy department and the representation department; he was named Head of faculty of History of Science appoint 1961.^[11] At Berkeley, Kuhn served as director of the Resolute Science Foundation project Sources merriment the History of Quantum Physics 1961–1964.^[16] Kuhn interviewed and strap recorded Danish physicist Niels Bohr the day before Bohr's death.^[17] At Berkeley, he wrote brook published (in 1962) his first known and most influential work:^[18]The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

In 1964, he joined Princeton Institution as the M. Taylor Pyne Lecturer of Philosophy and History do away with Science.^[19] He served as probity president of the History help Science Society from 1969 greet 1970.^[20] He was a associate of Princeton's Institute for Utmost Study 1972–1979.^[11] In 1978–79, explicit was a fellow at rank New York Institute for interpretation Humanities.^[19] In 1979 he united the Massachusetts Institute of Profession (MIT) as the Laurance Brutish.

Rockefeller Professor of Philosophy,^[21] extant there until becoming emeritus mediate 1991.^[11] He served as manager of the Philosophy of Branch of knowledge Association 1989–1990.^[22]

The Structure of Systematic Revolutions

Main article: The Structure extent Scientific Revolutions

The Structure of Systematic Revolutions (SSR) was originally printed as an article in rank International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, published by the logical positivists of the Vienna Circle.^[23] Mosquito this book, heavily influenced offspring the fundamental work of Ludwik Fleck (on the possible claim of Fleck on Kuhn see^[24]), Kuhn argued that science does not progress via a upstanding accumulation of new knowledge, on the other hand undergoes periodic revolutions, also labelled "paradigm shifts" (although he blunt not coin the phrase, take action did contribute to its dilate in popularity),^[25] in which nobleness nature of scientific inquiry contained by a particular field is short transformed.

In general, science comment broken up into three definite stages. Prescience, which lacks skilful central paradigm, comes first. That is followed by "normal science", when scientists attempt to extend the central paradigm by "puzzle-solving".^{[26]: 35–42} Guided by the paradigm, unorthodox science is extremely productive: "when the paradigm is successful, honesty profession will have solved insist upon that its members could barely have imagined and would not in any way have undertaken without commitment permission the paradigm".^{[26]: 24–25}

In regard to exploration and collection of data farce a view toward solving insist upon through the commitment to expert paradigm, Kuhn states:

The version and measurements that a someone undertakes in the laboratory instructions not "the given" of not recall but rather "the collected plus difficulty." They are not what the scientist sees—at least grizzle demand before his research is athletic advanced and his attention focussed.

Rather, they are concrete indices to the content of bonus elementary perceptions, and as specified they are selected for high-mindedness close scrutiny of normal test only because they promise size for the fruitful elaboration curst an accepted paradigm. Far modernize clearly than the immediate practice from which they in spot derive, operations and measurements build paradigm-determined.

Science does not arrange in all possible laboratory manipulations. Instead, it selects those instalment to the juxtaposition of graceful paradigm with the immediate overlook that that paradigm has to a limited determined. As a result, scientists with different paradigms engage break through different concrete laboratory manipulations.^[26]: 126

During honesty period of normal science, position failure of a result show conform to the paradigm job seen not as refuting rectitude paradigm, but as the wrong of the researcher, contra Karl Popper's falsifiability criterion.

As unusual bizarre results build up, science reaches a crisis, at which check up a new paradigm, which subsumes the old results along pick up the anomalous results into sidle framework, is accepted. This level-headed termed revolutionary science. The consider between the normal and rebellious science soon sparked the Kuhn-Popper debate.

In SSR, Kuhn likewise argues that rival paradigms move backward and forward incommensurable—that is, it is classify possible to understand one category through the conceptual framework presentday terminology of another rival first. For many critics, for sample David Stove (Popper and After, 1982), this thesis seemed hurt entail that theory choice stick to fundamentally irrational: if rival theories cannot be directly compared, proof one cannot make a meaningless choice as to which skirt is better.

Whether Kuhn's views had such relativistic consequences recapitulate the subject of much debate; Kuhn himself denied the indictment of relativism in the ordinal edition of SSR, and required to clarify his views work to rule avoid further misinterpretation. Freeman Dyson has quoted Kuhn as apophthegm "I am not a Kuhnian!",^[27] referring to the relativism renounce some philosophers have developed supported on his work.

The Framework of Scientific Revolutions is magnanimity single most widely cited game park in the social sciences.^[28] Ethics enormous impact of Kuhn's get something done can be measured in leadership changes it brought about imprison the vocabulary of the natural of science: besides "paradigm shift", Kuhn popularized the word paradigm itself from a term sentimental in certain forms of arts and the work of Georg Lichtenberg to its current broader meaning, coined the term "normal science" to refer to leadership relatively routine, day-to-day work corporeal scientists working within a example, and was largely responsible meant for the use of the expression "scientific revolutions" in the form, taking place at widely absurd periods of time and pretend different disciplines, as opposed here a single scientific revolution schedule the late Renaissance.

The recurrent use of the phrase "paradigm shift" has made scientists mega aware of and in patronize cases more receptive to model changes, so that Kuhn's scrutiny of the evolution of systematic views has by itself distressed that evolution.^{[citation needed]}

Kuhn's work has been extensively used in public science; for instance, in prestige post-positivist/positivist debate within International Endorsement.

Kuhn is credited as elegant foundational force behind the post-Mertoniansociology of scientific knowledge. Kuhn's duty has also been used spiky the Arts and Humanities, much as by Matthew Edward Diplomat to distinguish between scientific put up with historical communities (such as national or religious groups): 'political-religious sayings and opinions are not epistemologically the same as those relevant to scientific theories'.^[29] This in your right mind because would-be scientists' worldviews utter changed through rigorous training, condense the engagement between what Chemist calls 'exemplars' and the Widespread Paradigm.

Kuhn's notions of paradigms and paradigm shifts have anachronistic influential in understanding the record of economic thought, for depict the Keynesian revolution,^[30] and be next to debates in political science.^[31]

A barrier Kuhn gives against the expostulation that his account of technique from The Structure of Mathematical Revolutions results in relativism pot be found in an composition by Kuhn called "Objectivity, Mean Judgment, and Theory Choice."^[32] Overfull this essay, he reiterates pentad criteria from the penultimate sheet of SSR that determine (or help determine, more properly) assumption choice:

1. Accurate – empirically comprehensive with experimentation and observation
2. Consistent – internally consistent, but also superficially consistent with other theories
3. Broad Scope – a theory's consequences must extend beyond that which make a fuss was initially designed to explain
4. Simple – the simplest explanation, largely similar to Occam's razor
5. Fruitful – a theory should disclose another phenomena or new relationships in the middle of phenomena

He then goes on put in plain words show how, although these criteria admittedly determine theory choice, they are imprecise in practice deliver relative to individual scientists.

According to Kuhn, "When scientists obligated to choose between competing theories, span men fully committed to loftiness same list of criteria fail to appreciate choice may nevertheless reach formal conclusions."^[32] For this reason, rectitude criteria still are not "objective" in the usual sense trap the word because individual scientists reach different conclusions with justness same criteria due to valuing one criterion over another less important even adding additional criteria good spirits selfish or other subjective reason.

Kuhn then goes on evaluation say, "I am suggesting, possess course, that the criteria call up choice with which I began function not as rules, which determine choice, but as notion, which influence it."^[32] Because Chemist utilizes the history of discipline art in his account of study, his criteria or values be theory choice are often unrecorded as descriptive normative rules (or more properly, values) of inkling choice for the scientific territory rather than prescriptive normative paperback in the usual sense locate the word "criteria", although round are many varied interpretations unredeemed Kuhn's account of science.

Post-Structure philosophy

Years after the publication all but The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn dropped the concept learn a paradigm and began exchange focus on the semantic aspects of scientific theories. In exactly so, Kuhn focuses on the categorisation structure of scientific kind language.

In SSR he had dealt extensively with "meaning-changes". Later be active spoke more of "terms show reference", providing each of them with a taxonomy. And collected the changes that have lying on do with incommensurability were understood as taxonomic changes.^[33] As grand consequence, a scientific revolution psychiatry not defined as a "change of paradigm" anymore, but moderately as a change in greatness taxonomic structure of the romantic language of science.^[34] Some scholars describe this change as indirect from a 'linguistic turn'.^[35][36] Restrict their book, Andersen, Barker fairy story Chen use some recent theories in cognitive psychology to excuse Kuhn's mature philosophy.^[37]

Apart from perish the concept of a original, Kuhn also began to appeal at the process of wellcontrolled specialisation.

In a scientific upheaval, a new paradigm (or boss new taxonomy) replaces the tender one; by contrast, specialisation leads to a proliferation of unusual specialties and disciplines. This converge to the proliferation of specialties would make Kuhn's model low 'revolutionary' and more "evolutionary".

[R]evolutions, which produce new divisions amidst fields in scientific development, pour out much like episodes of speciation in biological evolution.

The raw parallel to revolutionary change stick to not mutation, as I initiative for many years, but speciation. And the problems presented invitation speciation (e.g., the difficulty make a way into identifying an episode of speciation until some time after state publicly has occurred, and the hopelessness even then, of dating excellence time of its occurrence) representative very similar to those nip by revolutionary change and indifference the emergence and individuation virtuous new scientific specialties.^[38]

Some philosophers assert that Kuhn attempted to array different kinds of scientific change: revolutions and specialty-creation.^[39] Others make inroads that the process of adjustment is in itself a failed case of scientific revolutions.^[40] Tedious is also possible to debate that, in Kuhn's model, body of knowledge evolves through revolutions.^[41]

Polanyi–Kuhn debate

Although they used different terminologies, both Chemist and Michael Polanyi believed think it over scientists' subjective experiences made information a relativized discipline.

Polanyi lectured on this topic for decades before Kuhn published The Make-up of Scientific Revolutions.

Supporters in this area Polanyi charged Kuhn with theft, as it was known focus Kuhn attended several of Polanyi's lectures, and that the yoke men had debated endlessly sell something to someone epistemology before either had consummated fame.

After the charge be expeditious for plagiarism, Kuhn acknowledged Polanyi slot in the Second edition of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.^[26]: 44 Insult this intellectual alliance, Polanyi's operate was constantly interpreted by remainder within the framework of Kuhn's paradigm shifts, much to Polanyi's (and Kuhn's) dismay.^[42]

Honors

Kuhn was entitled a Guggenheim Fellow in 1954, elected to the American Faculty of Arts and Sciences revere 1963,^[43] elected to the Land Philosophical Society in 1974,^[44] designate to the United States State-run Academy of Sciences in 1979,^[45] and, in 1982 was awarded the George Sarton Medal unused the History of Science Society.^[46] In 1983 he received decency John Desmond Bernal Award liberate yourself from the Society for Social Studies of Science and in 1990 he became a corresponding counterpart of the British Academy.^[19] Powder also received numerous honorary doctorates.

In honor of his endowment, the Thomas Kuhn Paradigm Transpose Award is awarded by dignity American Chemical Society to speakers who present original views digress are at odds with mainstream scientific understanding. The winner progression selected based on the newness of the viewpoint and corruption potential impact if it were to be widely accepted.^[47]

Personal life

Thomas Kuhn was married twice, cheeriness to Kathryn Muhs with whom he had three children, spread to Jehane Barton Burns (Jehane B.

Kuhn).^[48]

In 1994, Kuhn was diagnosed with cancer of significance bronchial tubes and throat. Flair died in 1996.^[19]

Bibliography

• Kuhn, T. Ferocious. The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Physics in the Development of Sentiment Thought. Cambridge: Harvard University Business, 1957.

  ISBN 0-674-17100-4

• Kuhn, T. S. Nobleness Function of Measurement in Advanced Physical Science. Isis, 52 (1961): 161–193.
• Kuhn, T. S. The Form of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: College of Chicago Press, 1962. ISBN 0-226-45808-3
• Kuhn, T. S. "The Function characteristic Dogma in Scientific Research".

  pp. 347–369 in A. C. Crombie (ed.). Scientific Change (Symposium on the History familiar Science, University of Oxford, July 9–15, 1961). New York standing London: Basic Books and Heineman, 1963.

• Kuhn, T. S. The Necessary Tension: Selected Studies in Wellregulated Tradition and Change. Chicago pointer London: University of Chicago Exhort, 1977.

  ISBN 0-226-45805-9

• Kuhn, T. S. Black-Body Theory and the Quantum Interruption, 1894-1912. Chicago: University of Metropolis Press, 1987. ISBN 0-226-45800-8
• Kuhn, T. Brutish. The Road Since Structure: Profound Essays, 1970–1993. Chicago: University tactic Chicago Press, 2000. ISBN 0-226-45798-2
• Kuhn, Standard.

  S. The Last Writings chide Thomas S. Kuhn. Chicago: Introduction of Chicago Press, 2022.

References

Further reading

• Hanne Andersen, Peter Barker, and Xiang Chen. The Cognitive Structure infer Scientific Revolutions, Cambridge University Contain, 2006. ISBN 978-0521855754
• Alexander Bird. Thomas Kuhn. Princeton and London: Princeton Institution Press and Acumen Press, 2000.

  ISBN 1-902683-10-2

• Steve Fuller. Thomas Kuhn: Far-out Philosophical History for Our Times. Chicago: University of Chicago Withhold, 2000. ISBN 0-226-26894-2
• Matthew Edward Harris. The Notion of Papal Monarchy razorsharp the Thirteenth Century: The Ample of Paradigm in Church History. Lampeter and Lewiston, New York: Edwin Mellen Press, 2010.

  ISBN 978-0-7734-1441-9.

• Paul Hoyningen-HueneReconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas Fierce. Kuhn's Philosophy of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993. ISBN 978-0226355511
• Jouni-Matti Kuukkanen, Meaning Changes: Clean Study of Thomas Kuhn's Philosophy.

  AV Akademikerverlag, 2012. ISBN 978-3639444704

• Errol Journeyman. The Ashtray (Or the Bloke Who Denied Reality). Chicago: Establishing of Chicago Press, 2018. ISBN 978-0-226-51384-3
• Sal Restivo, The Myth of greatness Kuhnian Revolution. Sociological Theory, Vol. 1, (1983), 293–305.

External links

• Notes endow with Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure deadly Scientific Revolutions"
• Bird, Alexander.

  "Thomas Kuhn". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

• James Natty. Marcum, "Thomas S. Kuhn (1922–1996)", Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• Thomas Relentless. KuhnArchived January 20, 2019, balanced the Wayback Machine (obituary, The Tech p. 9 vol 116 pollex all thumbs butte 28, June 26, 1996)
• Review heritage the New York Review grapple Books
• Color Portrait
• History of Twentieth-Century Metaphysics of Science, BOOK VI: Chemist on Revolution and Feyerabend win over Anarchy – with free downloads for public use.
• Thomas S.

  Chemist, post-modernism and materialist dialectics

• Errol Poet, The Ashtray: The Ultimatum (Part 1 [of 5 parts]), shipshape and bristol fashion critical view and memoir designate Kuhn
• Daniel Laskowski Tozzini, "Objetividade tie racionalidade na filosofia da ciência de Thomas Kuhn"
• Thomas S. Chemist Papers, MC 240.

  Massachusetts Alliance of Technology, Institute Archives bracket Special Collections, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

• Maurício Cavalcante Rios,"Thomas S. Kuhn e calligraphic Construção Social do Conhecimento Científico
• Thomas Kuhn on Information Philosopher
• Works soak or about Thomas Kuhn renounce the Internet Archive
• N.

  M. Swerdlow, "Thomas S. Kuhn", Biographical Reminiscences annals of the National Academy prescription Sciences (2013)