1962
Through a historical tracing of science Kuhn, himself a physical scientist, paints science as a social process which, throughout its history, has primarily been governed by universal social norms and practices of social relations, not cognitive strategies. Every science proceeds through certain phases. The majority of scientific activity and thought is dominated by stable paradigms and normal science. Most of the time, most scientists are doing normal science within the stable framework of the dominant paradigm in their disciplines.
The paradigm, which Kuhn saw as “universally recognized scientific achievements that for a time provide model problems and solutions to a community of practitioners”, provides frames of reference and direction for scientists. Without these paradigms scientists couldn’t speak the same scientific ‘language’, or know where to look, what questions to ask, or how to answer them. In a way, paradigms provide scientists rules they can trust and a general picture of what they’re trying to create.
When new evidence cannot be interpreted within the existing paradigm anomalies manifest, increasing the internal pressure. If that pressure continues to build without release, a crisis might occur. During this period, scientists begin to examine the paradigm itself, rather than through it, which can proceed into what Kuhn famously calls a scientific revolution during which a new paradigm must be established.
This text presents an essential description of science that has and should familiarize science communication with the very thing it’s trying to “sell”. This view of science, rather than say the classical Baconian one, forces science communication to tread with added caution and humility. It reminds us that what is the science of today might very well be the pseudoscience of tomorrow. While I prefer Ludwik Fleck’s model of science in terms of thought collectives[1] (the primary influence for Kuhn’s work), Kuhn’s paradigms present a more accessible user-friendly model that both science communication scholars and practitioners can glean from.
Reference:
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press.