Thomas Kuhn Paradigm Shift | Simply Psychology

Science has a paradigm which remains constant before going through a paradigm shift when current theories can't explain some phenomenon, ... Togglenavigation TheoriesResearchMethodsCriminologyA-levelStatistics TheoriesScienceParadigmShiftThomasKuhn-ScienceasaParadigmThomasKuhn-ScienceasaParadigmByDr.SaulMcLeod,published2020Take-homeMessagesofKuhn'sIdeaThomasKuhnarguedthatsciencedoesnotevolvegraduallytowardstruth.Sciencehasaparadigmwhichremainsconstantbeforegoingthroughaparadigmshiftwhencurrenttheoriescan’texplainsomephenomenon,andsomeoneproposesanewtheory.Ascientific revolutionoccurswhen:(i)thenewparadigmbetterexplainstheobservations,andoffersa modelthatisclosertotheobjective,externalreality;and(ii)thenewparadigmisincommensuratewiththeold.Forexample,LamarckianevolutionwasreplacedwithDarwin’stheoryof evolutionbynaturalselection.ThomasKuhnattacks“development-by-accumulation”viewsof sciencewhichholdthatscienceprogresseslinearly byaccumulationoftheory-independentfacts. Kuhn lookedatthehistoryofscienceandarguedthat sciencedoesnotsimplyprogressbystagesbased uponneutralobservations(e.g.Positivism). ForKuhn,thehistoryofscienceischaracterizedby revolutionsinscientificoutlook.Scientistshaveaworldviewor"paradigm". Aparadigmisauniversallyrecognizablescientific achievementthat,foratime,providesmodel problemsandsolutionstoacommunityof practitioners.Scientistsaccept thedominantparadigmuntilanomaliesarethrownup. Scientiststhenbegintoquestionthebasisofthe paradigmitself,newtheoriesemergewhichchallenge thedominantparadigmandeventuallyoneofthese newtheoriesbecomesacceptedasthenewparadigm.Duringdifferentperiodsofscience,certain perspectivesheldswayoverthethinkingof researchers. Aparticularworkmay“definethe legitimateproblemsandmethodsofaresearchfield forsucceedinggenerationsofpractitioners.”Kuhn'sPhasesofScienceKuhn'sPhasesofScienceKnowledgewhichdoesnotevolveaccordingtothe fourmainphases,accordingtoKuhn,maynotbe consideredscientific.Phase1:Pre-sciencePhase1:Pre-scienceThepre-paradigmaticstatereferstoaperiodbeforeascientific consensushasbeenreached.Disorganizedanddiverseactivity.Constantdebateoverfundamentals.Asmanytheoriesastherearetheorists.Nocommonlyacceptedobservationalbasis.The conflictingtheoriesareconstitutedwiththeirown setoftheory-dependentobservations.Phase2:NormalScience(mostcommon–scienceisusually stable)Phase2:NormalScience(mostcommon–scienceisusually stable)Aparadigmisestablishedwhichlaysthefoundations forlegitimateworkwithinthediscipline. Scientificworkthenconsistsinarticulationofthe paradigm,insolvingpuzzlesthatitthrowsup.Aparadigmisaconventionalbasisforresearch;it setsaprecedent.Puzzlesthatresistsolutionsareseenasanomalies.Anomaliesaretoleratedanddonotcausethe rejectionofthetheory,asscientistsareconfidenttheseanomaliescanbeexplainedovertime.ScientistsspendmuchoftheirtimeintheModelDriftstep,battlinganomaliesthathaveappeared.Theymayormaynotknowthisoracknowledgeit.Itisnecessaryfornormalsciencetobeuncritical. Ifallscientistswerecriticalofatheoryand spenttimetryingtofalsifyit,nodetailedwork wouldevergetdone."NormalScience,theactivityinwhichmostscientistsinevitablyspendalmostalloftheirtime,ispredicatedontheassumptionthatthescientificcommunityknowswhattheworldislike.Muchofthesuccessoftheenterprisederivesfromthecommunity'swillingnesstodefendthatassumption,ifnecessaryatconsiderablecost.NormalScience,forexample,oftensuppressesfundamentalnoveltiesbecausetheyarenecessarilysubversiveofitsbasiccommitments"(Kuhn,1996,p.5).Phase3:CrisisPhase3:CrisisThisiswheretheparadigmshiftoccurs.Anomaliesbecomeserious,andacrisisdevelopsif theanomaliesunderminethebasicassumptionsofthe paradigmandattemptstoremovethemconsistently fail.Underthesecircumstancestherulesforthe applicationoftheparadigmbecomerelaxed.Ideas thatchallengetheexistingparadigmaredeveloped.Incrisistherewillbe‘extraordinaryscience’ wheretherewillbeseveralcompetingtheories.Iftheanomaliescanberesolved,thecrisisisoverandnormalscienceresumes.Ifnot,thereisascientificrevolutionwhichinvolvesachangeofparadigm.Phase4:RevolutionPhase4:RevolutionEventuallyanewparadigmwillbeestablished,but notasaresultofanylogicallycompelling justification.Thereasonsforthechoiceofaparadigmarelargely psychologicalandsociological.Thenewparadigmbetterexplainstheobservations,andoffersa modelthatisclosertotheobjective,externalrealityDifferentparadigmsareheldtobeincommensurable—thenewparadigmcannotbeprovenordisprovenbytherulesoftheoldparadigm,andviceversa.Thereisnonaturalmeasureorscaleforranking differentparadigms.CriticalEvaluationCriticalEvaluationTheenormousimpactofThomasKuhn'sworkcanbemeasured inthechangesitbroughtaboutinthevocabularyof thephilosophyofscience:besides"paradigmshift", Kuhnraisedtheword"paradigm"itselffromaterm usedincertainformsoflinguisticstoitscurrent broadermeaning.Thefrequentuseofthephrase "paradigmshift"hasmadescientistsmoreawareof andinmanycasesmorereceptivetoparadigm changes,sothatKuhn’sanalysisoftheevolutionof scientificviewshasbyitselfinfluencedthat evolution.ForKuhn,thechoiceofparadigmwassustainedby, butnotultimatelydeterminedby,logicalprocesses. Kuhnbelievedthatitrepresentedtheconsensusof thecommunityofscientists.Acceptanceorrejection ofsomeparadigmis,heargued,asocialprocessas muchasalogicalprocess.ThismeansKuhnhasbeenaccusedofbeingarelativist.Maybeallthetheories areequallyvalid?Whyshouldwebelievetoday’ssciencewhenit mightbeoverturnedinfuture?Kuhnvigorouslyrejectedthis,claiming thatscientificrevolutionshavealwaysledtonew,moreaccurate theories,andrepresenttrueprogress.Doessciencemakeprogressthroughscientific revolutions? Arelaterparadigmsbetterthanearlier ones?No,Kuhnsuggests,theyarejustdifferent. Thescientificrevolutionswhichsupplantone paradigmwithanotherdonottakeusclosertothe truthaboutthewaytheworldis. Successive paradigmsareincommensurable.Kuhnsaysthata laterparadigmmaybeabetterinstrumentfor solvingpuzzlesthananearlierone. Butifeach paradigmdefinesitsownpuzzles,whatisapuzzle foroneparadigmmaybenopuzzleatallfor another. Sowhyisitprogresstoreplaceone paradigmwithanotherwhichsolvespuzzlesthatthe earlierparadigmdoesnotevenrecognize?Kuhnused hisincommensurabilitythesistodisprovetheview theparadigmshiftsareobjective.Truthisrelative totheparadigm.Sciencedoesnotchangeitsparadigmovernight. Youngerscientiststakeanewparadigmforward.As Kuhnputit"anewscientifictruthdoesnottriumph byconvincingitsopponentsandmakingthemseethe light,butratherbecauseitsopponentseventually die,andanewgenerationgrowsupthatisfamiliar withit."ThomasKuhnshowedcontemporaryphilosopherscould notignorethehistoryofscienceandthesocial contextwhichsciencetakesplace. Scienceisa productofthesocietyinwhichitispracticed.DiscussionQuestion:Ispsychologyapre-science?Wasthereacognitive revolutionfrombehaviorismthatchanged methodologyandassumptions?Iscognitivepsychologyanewparadigm? Hints:It'sstillreductionist,input–output,stillusestheexperimentalmethod.APAStyleReferencesThomas,K.(1962).ThestructureofscientificrevolutionsChicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.FurtherInformationKarlPopper-Falsification IsPsychologyaScience? TheScientificRevolutionsofThomasKuhn:ParadigmShiftsExplainedHowtoreferencethisarticle:Howtoreferencethisarticle:McLeod,S.A.(2020,May01).Thomaskuhn-scienceasaparadigm.SimplyPsychology.www.simplypsychology.org/Kuhn-Paradigm.html Home|AboutUs|PrivacyPolicy|Advertise|ContactUsBacktotopThisworkislicensedunderaCreativeCommonsAttribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivativeWorks3.0UnportedLicense.CompanyRegistrationno:10521846reportthisadFurtherInformationKarlPopper IsPsychologyaScience? TheScientificRevolutionsofThomasKuhn:ParadigmShiftsExplainedreportthisadxx