by Thomas Kuhn, famous author of the novel The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, makes many claims about how science progresses as a field. He is the main inventor of the term paradigm, which is considered the basics of each field of science, a sort of basis for anyone looking to learn in that field for which to refer back to. The heavily disputed concept in Kuhn’s book is the idea that science progresses through the discovery of anomalies, and the resulting conclusions found lead to a paradigm shift.
In this way, Kuhn believes that scientific progress does not follow a linear path, but one with momentary bursts of significant progress. Although many refute his claims, there are several examples in the history of science which support them, such as the discovery of the Planck spectrum of black body radiation, and the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in England.
Before Max Planck discovered a formula to describe how black-body radiation diverged at higher frequencies, classical physicists had no explanation as to why this happened. They believed that the radiation should be emitted constantly no matter what frequency it reached, but for some reason this was not true. Once Planck’s formula brought an answer to this anomaly, the field of physics began a paradigm shift, from the classic physics of the pre 20th century, to the study of quantum physics. This example perfectly illustrates Kuhn’s idea of paradigm shifts. There was some anomaly in a widely accepted field of science, and the solution/study of this anomaly opened up a whole new idea about the field, thus a paradigm shift.
Kuhn’s theory about science changing through paradigm shifts also can be applied to technology, as seen in the Industrial Revolution. This period of rapid technological advancement was aided by a few acts of innovative genius that allowed for spread of ideas and the growth of technology. For example, agricultural advancement was seen when inventions like the seed drill popped up and inspired many other machines like it. Although not a direct example of paradigm shift, the rapid production of new technology resulted due to a new outlook on the fundamentals of industrial innovation. People began to push the boundaries and a period of rapid progression in the industrial fields resulted.
The main argument that refutes the idea that anomaly and paradigm shifts result in scientific progression is that one scientific discovery leads to the next, and scientific theory and hypotheses are constantly being modified. Although some scientific theory does get adjusted and is not proven completely wrong, theories oftentimes become outdated and incorrect when they are disproven by an anomaly. There are very few scientific theories that followed today, that have lasted over a century. After a paradigm shift, the theories tend to become unimportant and wrong in many ways, and this is why Kuhn’s claims are so valid.
In conclusion, Kuhn’s theory that scientific revolutions come when anomalies are discovered, and the result is a paradigm shift, is supported by centuries of scientific data. Although many people refute his ideas by saying that theories can be molded to fit new and improved data and observations, Kuhn’s writing about paradigm shifts seems to be the most correct way of thinking about scientific progress. Events in the history of science like the discovery of quantum physics, as well as technological innovation during the industrial revolution, make the case stronger that science does not follow a linear path of growth, but one where anomalies and feats of unheard of innovation lead to a major change in the thinking of scientists.
Works Cited
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/the-power-of-anomalies/
http://rossby.msrc.sunysb.edu/~marat/MAR542/ATM542-Chapter2.pdf
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/article/industrial-revolution-and-technology/