Chapter 4

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

- T. Kuhn
A: Though its outcome can be anticipated,
often in detail so great that what remains to
be known is itself uninteresting, the way to
achieve that outcome remains very much in
doubt. Bringing a normal research problem to
a conclusion is achieving the anticipated in a
new way, and it requires the solution of all
sorts of complex instrumental, conceptual,
and mathematical puzzles. (36)
The challenge of cleverly solving the puzzle is
(the motive) why scientists pursue research.
Puzzle-solving
guarantees a solution.
leads to success.
is what the individual scientist does.
is constrained by the paradigm.
Newton example
Phlogiston example
Dark matter/MOND example
The most striking feature of the normal
research problems we have just encountered is
how little they aim to produce major novelties,
conceptual or phenomenal.
Normal science, like a puzzle, has a
predetermined solution.
e.g. Coloumbs Measurements
During an experiment, sometimes, everything
except the most specific of details are known in
advance. It would only be a matter of proving it.
Despite the fact that the range of the anticipated
results are small compared to the possible results.

Problem: If the aim of normal science is not major
substantive novelties if failure to come near the
anticipated result is usually failure as a scientist
then why are these problems undertaken at all?

Answer: A small amount of information is valuable
because it could add to the precision in which a
paradigm can be applied.
Scientist spurn excessive data gathering/testing
because they find them repetitious, albeit
significant.
Repetition ensures and enforces a paradigm.
Bringing a normal research problem to a conclusion
is achieving the anticipated in a new way, and it
requires all sorts of complex mathematical puzzles.
The man who succeeds proves himself to be an
expert puzzle-solver, and the challenge is an
important part of what usually drives him.
SO WHY DO RESEARCH?

Though its outcome can be anticipated, often
in detail so great that what remains to be known
is itself uninteresting, the way to achieve that
outcome remains very much in doubt. Bringing a
normal research problem to a conclusion is
achieving the anticipated in a new way, and it
REQUIRES A SOLUTION of all sorts of complex
instrumental, conceptual, and mathematical
puzzles

1. Results add to the scope and precision with which a
paradigm/theory can be applied.

A paradigm is a criterion in choosing problems so when the
paradigm is taken for granted, it can be assumed to have a
solutions.

2. The way to obtain the results usually remains very much
in doubt this is the challenge of the puzzle.
The challenge of cleverly solving the puzzle is why
scientists pursue research.
if he is skilful enough then he will succeed in solving
the puzzle that no one has ever solved or solved so
well.
Solving the puzzle can be fun, and expert puzzle-
solvers make a very nice living.

1. There exist a strong network of commitments

a. conceptual- relating to concepts or mental
conception

b. theoretical- relating to, or based on
theories
c. instrumental- relating to instrumentalism

d. methodological-theoretical analysis of
such working methods
principal source of the metaphor that relates
normal science to puzzle-solving
Scientific Rules
Normal science is a highly determined activity,
but it need not be entirely determined by
rules. There are "rules" that limit.
Normal science only partly determined by
these rules.
1. Rules about what specific
sorts of things exist, and
what kinds of relations
obtain.
2. Rules about preferred sorts
of instrumentation.
3. Rules about what the world
is like, generally.
4. Highest-level rules.
Ontological Rules
Experimental Rules
Metaphysical Rules
Methodological Rules