Theories about scientific revolutions other than Kuhn
- xushan
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: September 7th, 2022, 7:41 am
Theories about scientific revolutions other than Kuhn
-
- Premium Member
- Posts: 750
- Joined: December 11th, 2019, 9:18 am
Re: Theories about scientific revolutions other than Kuhn
Episode 86: Thomas Kuhn on Scientific Progress
On The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, published mostly in 1962.
Does scientific knowledge simply accumulate as we learn more and more, coming closer and closer to a full and truthful picture of the world? Kuhn says no! Instead, each scientific sub-culture has its own "paradigm," or model for what constitutes legitimate science, which includes what problems to study, what to counts as a result, some background assumptions, and other things nebulous enough that you really can't enumerate them. While Kuhn still believes that the movement to a new paradigm constitutes progress in a sense, the traditional picture of progressive science is still wrong.
Dylan enthuses at a weary Mark, Wes, and Seth over this fast and furious book, which is chock full of stories about phlogiston and all things mechanico-corpuscular.
https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/2013/ ... omas-kuhn/
The podcast Partially Examined Life provides a conversational perspective by professors of philosophy which has proven to be very effective in providing a relative quick in-depth perspective on philosophical works.
With regard alternative theories. The idea of 'Universal Mind' or Zeitgeist might be a concept of interest. While it isn't about science its inner workings, there might be some philosophical work on the subject that does provide insight into the inner workings of science relative to the idea of a Universal Mind (or universal scientific progress).
Simultaneous Discoveries in History
“Rather than being the products of the individual mind, multiples (aka - simultaneous discoveries) are said to prove that creative ideas are the effects of the zeitgeist, or universal mind.
https://www.savvyhistory.com/simultaneo ... n-history/
With regard plausibility of the idea of a Universal Mind and thus the idea that scientific progress is created by the effort of all scientists combined.
A recent study discovered that all particles in the Universe are entangled by 'kind'. This would provide evidence.
(2020) Is nonlocality inherent in all identical particles in the universe?
The photon emitted by the monitor screen and the photon from the distant galaxy at the depths of the universe seem to be entangled only by their identical nature. This is a great mystery that science will soon confront.
https://phys.org/news/2020-03-nonlocali ... verse.html
Another clue may be the Cambrian explosion . It is a period of the early earth ~530 million years ago in which all the basic structures of life forms of earth suddenly appeared on earth.
(2020) The Cambrian Explosion Mystery: Fossils still say no to Darwin
In the Cambrian Explosion, all the major animal groups first appear as fossils. They appear suddenly, fully-formed, and functional, and the older rock layers below them contain no ancestors.
https://www.icr.org/article/the-fossils ... -explosion
It was known and unexplainable during Darwin's time but he said that science would find the 'missing' transition fossils.
Until today, those transition fossils haven't been found which may indicate that the evolution theory isn't valid and that 'kind' in nature has an infinite or non-local origin.
Another clue may be what is named Crabification of animals. In nature, crustacean animals keep evolving into asymmetrical crab-form with one big claw and a smaller claw, and many features that are specific to crab-form. It received its own name: carcinization.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcinisation
According to Greek philosopher Plato, kind or form (e.g. specie) is of substance separate from individual life forms.
So instead of a 'universal mind', what is the case could be that 'kind' is applicable to mind which has implications that would justify the idea of a universal mind.Plato wrote:According to Plato, an individual dog, Fido, for example, since he is not 'dog as such', but only a dog, is not fully real. To be fully real, Fido would need to be the universal essence, "Dog in himself", existing in a separate world of universal Essences (subsisting forms, or Ideas).
Since Fido is merely a dog, he is not fully real; its reality is merely a participation in the reality of the universal essence. Hence, he is merely a shadow (albeit a real shadow) of the "really" Real, the separated Form, or Idea, existing in the World of Ideas.
It could imply that contributions by individual scientists, e.g. their thought process, would develop a universal innovation potential that is available to other participants within the scope of scientific progress.
- xushan
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: September 7th, 2022, 7:41 am
Re: Theories about scientific revolutions other than Kuhn
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023