Karl Popper The Enemy Of Certainty Analysis

Karl Popper The Enemy Of Certainty Analysis
In the three–part informative bibliography "Karl Popper, the enemy of certainty," published by The
Guardian, scientist and philosopher Karl Popper's perspective on science is identified and discussed.
Author Liz Williams describes how Karl Popper was driven by a passion for learning and
understanding the world around him, and eventually grew to reject the ideas of empiricism and
positivism. Popper states that deductive reasoning, rather than inductive reasoning, should be used
to evaluate a theory based on the idea that proving a theory false provides a stronger argument
compared to proving a theory true. Popper also argues that theories cannot be considered scientific
theories unless they are able to be proven false, or are falsifiable. They must be able to be tested, and
have the ability to be proven false through those tests, before it can be considered a scientific theory.
Popper argues that scientific revolutions come about ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Popper's scientific philosophy was solely based on truth, based on the idea that new scientific
theories are generated when old scientific theories are proven to be false; he states that in order for a
theory to be scientific, it must be falsifiable. On the other hand, Kuhn's philosophy was based on
thought, and how scientist's collective thoughts and theories change as concepts and practices
change with time. These two individuals have directly opposing philosophies– truth versus thought.
Finally, Lakatos' scientific philosophy acts as a happy medium between the two, describing science
and scientific revolutions as both truth and thought, although he did emphasize that truth may be a
more reliable factor. Whether it be truth, or thought, or both behind the changes in science over time,
it does not change the fact that scientific revolutions happen, and that they will continue to happen
throughout the course of
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The Revolution And Reformation During The Renaissance
Revolution and reformation; these are two words that are often identified with war, disagreement,
and regional effects. While these things do indeed come along with a revolution or reformation, they
heed an array of positive and secular outcomes as well. In addition, a revolution can, and usually
will, cause a reformation. Conversely, a reformation can cause a revolution. This can happen despite
the two things involved with the change or disagreement being seemingly unrelated. The world is
connected and affected in ways that we cannot comprehend until we look at our world's history and
see how every small occurrence leads to a landslide of repercussions. The Renaissance is a prime
example of this interconnectedness, as it was a time of rebirth, revolution and reformation. During
the Renaissance, many changes ensued as a result of scientists, scholars and humanists who realized
that they weren 't being taught or treated properly. This idea of unsatisfactory treatment as a result of
the humanist spirit of the Renaissance led to the Scientific Revolution and The Protestant
Reformation, movements that occurred during the Renaissance that changed life in Western Europe,
and eventually the whole world, forever.
Imagine being told that everything you have learned from school and books was based simply on the
beliefs of philosophers. All of the scientific readings that you and everyone you know have been
studying because you trusted them to be true were written not by

Scientific Revolution Research Paper
The Scientific Revolution
Have you ever thought when the humanity stepped into a new era of its history? It happened during
The Scientific Revolution when humans' views on nature and the world were drastically transformed
with the help of discoveries in the field of physics, science, mathematics chemistry, biology, and
astronomy. That period of the history was very important for humanity because of the collapse of the
ancient–medieval picture of the world, new scientific discoveries and the interaction between
science and other social institutions.
The biggest achievement in the Scientific Revolution was the collapse of the ancient–medieval
picture of the world. The new ideology was created, which helped to create the modern science. In
antiquity, the focus was on natural and cosmic life; during the Renaissance, there was a focus on
understanding the world through Humanism and the role of the person in the world. After all,
Descartes's philosophy, which was the foundations of the scientific method, did not deny the
creation of the world by God. However, it claimed that from that moment the world began to
develop with its internal laws. The next contributions to science were new scientific inventions.
Humans' views on nature were radically changed with the help of discoveries in the field of
mathematics, science, physics, and astronomy.The ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
On the whole, the Scientific Revolution consisted of internal and external factors, which interacted
with each other. The interaction between science and other social institutions was among the
external factors. Furthermore, that interaction influenced on the reassessment of people's values and
ideals in culture. In addition, the changes in the social structures happened, which led a
fundamentally new people's needs appear. People started thinking deeper about values in economic,
religion, politics, spirit, and

The Scientific Revolution And The Enlightenment
Kuda Masunungure Exam 2: Question 2 The Enlightenment was a period characterized by the idea
that people's use of reason could unlock the mysteries of the world around them. Thinkers of the
Enlightenment saw all aspects of the world–religion, wealth, and the earth itself–as being
understandable through natural laws. The reliance on and application of reason on the different
aspects of the world used by Enlightenment thinkers was directly informed by the Scientific
Revolution. In essence the presentation of and descriptive power of Enlightenment theories and
ideas would not have been possible without the strengthened exploratory and explanatory rigor
established in the Scientific Revolution. In terms of the PISCET categories discussed through the
lectures and the text, the most prevalent threads between the Scientific Revolution and the
Enlightenment is in their intellectual, economic, and political connections. During the Scientific
Revolution, the established ideas came from Aristotle. Aristotle's conception of the workings of the
universe–accepted to be a part of "Middle Ages cosmology" by professor Jones–set the empirical
and rational standard that all scientists set their sights upon. "If one's calculations did not fall inline
with the Aristotelian standard, it must not have been correct" (Buckowski lecture notes). The
revolutionary element came in the form of Ptolemy's modifications to Aristotle's standards to better
fit the phenomena he was observing. It is here

Thomas Kuhn 's The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions
Thomas Kuhn's, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, is masterful text giving insight on how
scientific progress occurs in our communities. Kuhn believed that science progressed in a
spontaneous and unpredictable manner, shaped by social and political factors of groups of scientific
community and not by development–by–accumulation. Although during the time this book was
published these claims seemed bold and extremely radical, in today's society we can relate to Kuhn's
views of scientific conduct. This was one of the most interesting and challenging novels I have read
so far in my academic career. I felt that it was extremely specific a very dense, but at the same time
very relatable. Being a science major my entire life, I had an interest before even beginning the text,
nonetheless while reading it. I thought the text was very enlightening and in a manner eye opening.
After reading Kuhn's book, my perspective of science has completely changed. Kuhn's bold
statements on the minor gaps that science leaves out even in its most perfect and established form,
provide a sense of guidance for his reasoning behind the episodic natures of a scientific revolutions.
Initially, I was a bit confused as to what Kuhn was arguing for and what points he was making. I
especially got lost when he began to dive into the concept of paradigmatic science and research. But
after talking about in lecture I had a much clearer view of what the book was about and from what
standpoint Kuhn was

Origins Of The Twin Revolutions
Yevgeniya Erdyniyeva
Instructor –Ibrahim Bilal
History 3005
December 1, 2015
What were the origins of the "twin revolutions" and how did they combine to create what we call
"modernity"?
Modernity, it is a macro process of transition from traditional to modern society. "Formation of a
modern political map of the world began in early 1800 in Western Europe and maybe characterized
as the product of the twin revolutions." European colonization of the New World, the economic and
political development of new territories led to significant changes in the political map. Modernity it
is a complex of multi–faceted process that took a place in Europe during the 18th century and had
covered all aspects of society. The modernity of the production meant the industrialization – is
constantly growing use of machines. In the social sphere modernization is closely linked with
urbanization, an unprecedented growth of cities, which led to prevailing in the economic life of
society. In the political sphere modernity meant the democracy of political structures, laying the
preconditions for the formation of a civil society and rule of law. In the spiritual realm associated
with secularization –: the release of all spheres of public and private life from the separation of
religion and the church, their worldliness and intensive development of literacy, education, scientific
knowledge. All of these are inextricably linked to each other processes of change emotional attitudes
of man,

Scientific Revolutions Chapter Summary
In The Structure of the Scientific Revolutions, Thomas S. Kuhn precisely articulates the
fundamental problems of the then current scientific historical model of knowledge acquired by
accretion and posits a model that Kuhn defines as a pattern involving the "normal science", the
transitional "scientific revolution", and the later "paradigm shift". Kuhn continues in the same
fashion as Karl Popper, Alexander Koyre and Paul Feyerabend in the continuing critique of a
positivistic interpretation of the history of science and offers an alternative perspective. Kuhn's book
specifically deals with the historical and philosophical aspects of science, but the book's impact has
had a significant influence on many other disciplines from which Kuhn's general ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
These "anomalies" are what Kuhn talks about in chapter six and they result in crises, which is
discussed in chapter seven, in which scientists reevaluate the fundamental understandings inherent
in the accepted paradigm to either fit these anomalies into the paradigm or creatively produce an
entirely new theory that can explain the anomalies. In response to such a monumental anomaly, an
austere and concrete paradigm loses its solidified perspective and becomes more flexible and
malleable creating an urgent need for a response. It is either solved and the paradigm survives,
deferred until it becomes too daunting, or an alternate paradigm is considered. If there is a transition
or shift to a new scientific theory it is called a "scientific revolution". In chapter nine, Kuhn
addresses the incompatibility of the original and new paradigms and how the new paradigm replaces
the old by often making it irreconcilable for the two theories to coexist. The new destroys the old
with a new fundamental set of beliefs that are instilled onto the new paradigm. Chapter ten displays
how the entire world–view of the scientist is changed. Kuhn offers the example of Wittgenstein's
rabbit–duck illusion to illustrate how scientists perceptions change dramatically from the acceptance
of a new theory. Chapter eleven, discusses the effects of textbooks and higher academia and how
they contribute to the invisibility of scientific revolution through the rigorous study that students
must bear in order to achieve academic success in the sciences. These textbooks pedagogically
bolster knowledge by the accretion of empirical data and therefore the principles presented by Kuhn
go largely unnoticed. Chapters twelve addresses a revolution's resolution by showing how scientist
watch the support of a paradigm wither away through Popperian

was there a Scientific Revolution In The Early Modern Era?
Was There A Scientific Revolution In The Early Modern Era?
The expression 'The Scientific revolution' is a controversial term in itself. The term is traditionally
used to describe the intellectual accomplishments made in astronomy and physical science during
the sixteenth and seventeenth century. Scholars during this age, such as Copernicus, Descartes,
Galileo and Bacon wrestled with the question about God, human propensity and the possibilities of
understanding the world. The insinuations of the innovative Scientific findings were beginning to
affect the way people thought and behaved throughout Europe. Society began to question the
authority of customary knowledge about the universe. This in doubt allowed them to question the
long–established traditional views of the state and social order. The beliefs that many people had
held for centuries had been proved false. Many Europeans began to query the authority of the
Church, and the Aristotelian system. A majority of Europeans were enlightened by this intellectual
progress, and a large quantity broke away from the church. The separation of the Aristotelian system
meant the formation of the establishment of modern science. The sixteenth and seventeenth century
is still considered as the most talked about era when regarding the history of science. 'The Scientific
Revolution' left the world with a more rational explanation of physics, in which the laws of motion
and gravity were

Why Did The Scientific Revolution Start In Europe
HOMEWORK QUESTIONS
(1) Why did the Scientific Revolution first begin in Europe? Why was the Scientific Revolution
"revolutionary"? How did it challenge the Catholic Church? Name two major scientific
breakthroughs in this period. Why did Ottoman scholars disregard European science?
Many aspects lead to the Scientific Revolution sparking initially in Europe including renew of their
legal system that allowed independence of a variety of institutions which encompassed universities.
From there it open the doors for intellectual autonomy where professors could teach and students
could learn anything they wanted without dictatorship form the church or state authorities. This in
turn led to the teachings of science and philosophers such as Aristotle. Not to mention that Europe at
the time was the center for the exchange of new information and knowledge. The Scientific
Revolution was radical because it challenged principals that had been established for so long
especially by the church. It changed people's perspective and understanding of the universe. By
providing science as an arguable explanation for things that occurred in the world it went against the
principles of faith that originally were used to explain phenomena. That in turn ... Show more
It was a fight amongst class whereas the American's was a fight against the born Englishmen and the
Crown. The players in the American Revolution only involved the British and the Americans plus
the French when they stepped into help. With the French Revolution they not only battled with
themselves but also took it beyond the boarders and fought neighboring countries. Lastly, the
Americans wanted restore old traditions and belief that originated in Britain whereas, the French
wanted a reincarnation where they started fresh and moved

Teaching the Philosophy of Science with Non-Scientific...
Teaching the Philosophy of Science with Non–Scientific Examples
ABSTRACT: This essay explores the benefits of utilizing non–scientific examples and analogies in
teaching philosophy of science courses, or general introductory courses. These examples can help
resolve two basic difficulties faced by most instructors, especially when teaching lower–level
courses: first, they can prompt students to take an active interest in the class material, since the
examples will involve aspects of the culture well–known to the students; second, these familiar,
less–threatening examples will lessen the students' collective anxieties and open them up to learning
the material more easily. To demonstrate this strategy of constructing and employing ... Show more
In this essay, one possible strategy for overcoming this obstacle, which has been culled from
personal experience, will be recommended by way of demonstration. In short, the suggestion is to
devise examples and analogies from outside the realm of science and its history, but which can serve
to both highlight and augment the actual scientific cases typically offered, as well as provide an
interesting test–bed for the exploration of philosophical concepts. If these examples are tailored to
reflect the interests of the students, most notably by drawing upon the humanities and popular
culture, then a marked increase in class enthusiasm and participation will be the likely result. In
short, these non–scientific analogies can help explain the nature and purpose of a
philosophical/scientific concept. In what follows, consequently, we will develop a lengthy example
which will demonstrate this very strategy: the philosophical concept will be Thomas Kuhn's notion
of a scientific "paradigm", the key element in his theory of scientific revolutions; and the non–
scientific topic adapted to explain this theory will be the history of musical styles and the structure
of musical compositions.
The concept of a

Science Revolutions and Inseases in Inventions Essay
Science Revolutions and Inseases in Inventions
Over the past millennium there have been several significant scientific revolutions that have led to
an increase in the amount of inventions within that field of science. Yet some scientific revolutions
have been restricted to a containment of research within the field and thus meant that no inventions
have occurred. Specific reasons for the increase in research are basically because new inventions
can help the needs of humans, yet the argument against the increase of inventions is because some
revolutions are not accepted or cannot be researched any further.
The argument can be supported with a significant amount of evidence that shows that ... Show more
Although he sparked off a scientific revolution which saved human lives his theory was largely
ignored as doctors found it hard to accept that they were killing there patients and that diseases were
contagious and transferable. But eventually Semmelweis's ideas did create new inventions such as
the Penicillin founded by Fleming, the discovery of soap by Marie Curie also supported the
arguments that Semmelweis proposed. His revolution was seen as an inspiration to Florence
Nightingale who became a hero during World War I for her life saving discoveries.
The scientific revolution that Francis Crick and James Watson set off is a clear example that if a
scientific revolution occurs it will cause an increase in the amount of inventions. Crick and Watson
discovered the structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and recognized how two pairs of
complementary bases would have identical shapes if held together by hydrogen bond. The find was
seen as the discovery of the century and it meant that Crick and Watson had little difficulty for
others to accept their discovery. The discovery sparked off many new inventions and industries, the
find meant that Genetically Modified food could be made, cloning of humans and animals was
accomplishable and it helped to create new medicines to save lives.
Although it can be said that there are

Thomas Kuhn Research Paper
Thomas Kuhn's View of Science Peter Roberts Thomas Kuhn was one of the most influential
philosophers of science of the 20st century. Beginning his academic career in physics, he developed
an interest in the history of science, which eventually saw him turn to the philosophy of science. His
ideas were influenced strongly by the time he spent studying the works of historical scientists, such
as Aristotle and Copernicus, in their original contexts. Kuhn were published his seminal work, The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions in 1962. Kuhn describes the work of scientists in a scientific field
as being conducted under the banner of a 'paradigm', which he defined as "universally recognized
scientific achievements that for a time provide model ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Paradigms, said Kuhn, were "accepted examples of actual scientific practice– examples which
include law, theory, application, and instrumentation together– ... models from which spring
particular coherent traditions of scientific research" 5 . The construction of a paradigm involves an
unprecedented scientific achievement (often solving a notoriously difficult problem in a field),
opening the way for many problems that promise to be solved using the methods and thought
demonstrated by that accomplishment. To support this view, Kuhn gave several examples of
historically significant paradigms, including Newton's understanding of Mechanics as published in
his Principia and Lavoisier's work in 2 Chemistry. A paradigm allows scientific research to
proceed by defining suitable scientific problems (for example the strength of the gravitational
constant suggested by Newtons work), and giving the scientist the confidence that the solutions to
such puzzles exist within the framework of the paradigm. A paradigm further promotes fruitful work
by allowing the scientist to continue the work of others, rather than each new scientist needing to
rebuild his field from fundamentals 6 . It was this promise of continued success in scientific problem
solving that led Kuhn to identify the existence of a governing paradigm to divide the scientific field
from

What Is Science and Where Did It Come From?
What is science and where did it come from? The study of science came before the scientific
revolution got to begin. The scientific revolution began in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. The
revolution was accomplished by developing the medieval roots of science of the classical age of
Greece and Rome. Throughout the scientific revolution, the medieval scientific philosophy was
abandoned in favor and improved methods proposed by different men. Finally, we are introduced to
scientists of mathematicians, astronomers, and philosophers. Sir Francis Bacon, Galileo, Rene
Descartes, and Isaac Newton are the famous people in the scientific method.
The scientific revolution proves that science is a source for the growth of knowledge. The history of
science manifests the chain of enhancements in technology and knowledge. We begin with Nicolas
Copernicus, who presented the heliocentric theory that is resting on the revolutionary notion that the
Earth orbited the sun. Copernicus worked on a heliocentric model– where the Earth is simply one of
several planets, which orbit the sun.
The next man we come to be Johannes Kepler, who contributes the three laws of planetary motion.
Kepler studied the orbits of the planets and sought to discern some grand scheme that defined the
structure of the universe according to simple geometry. Kepler also put together three laws of
planetary motion: first, the planets rotate in elliptical orbits with the sun at one of the centers. The
second

Scientific Revolution Dbq
Throughout the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, Europeans' world view was affected by several
scientific breakthroughs. This period of achievement is referred to as the Scientific Revolution. The
Scientific Revolution was not a single event, rather a series of events with contributions from many
people. Some of its main causes include individuals, the book written by Nicolaus Copernicus, and
the loss of power by the Catholic church. During this period, scholars made lasting contributions
that continue to affect the modern world. The Scientific Revolution had various effects, which
include the Enlightenment and advances in the sciences, especially in the fields of chemistry and
medicine.
The event that is most often cited as the start of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Prior to the scientific revolution, there was a branch of science called alchemy. Alchemists believed
that it was possible to change substances into other substances. Many alchemists tried to no avail to
turn ordinary metals into gold. During the Scientific Revolution, advances were made in chemistry
that disproved many beliefs of alchemy, causing it to stop being practiced. However, some practices,
including the manipulation of metals and acids evolved to become part of modern chemistry. An
influential person at this time was the English chemist Robert Boyle. Boyle improved upon the
alchemists' view of chemicals by describing chemicals as basic building blocks. Also, he said that
tiny particles made up all matter and had predictable behavior. Boyle, learned of the difference
between singular elements and chemical compounds. He also described how gases are affected by
temperature and pressure. Boyle's studies laid the groundwork of modern chemical analysis of the
composition of matter. Among other scientific fields, there were many advances made in chemistry
during the Scientific

Scientific Revolution Thomas Kuhn
In Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn states that a paradigm shift is a
revolutionary event as it causes the rise in a new era of science. A scientific revolution is when an
older paradigm is replaced completely or partially by a new paradigm. As the understanding of
science change, the more humans switch their world view. Thus, causing the rift between the
support between the old paradigm and the new. When it does, both sides must find reasons to
persuade others why the paradigm in question is correct for the new environment. Kuhn believes
that all paradigms mark the shift of environmental changes and human understanding and that not
only affects physical science but all sciences.
Kuhn believes that the universe is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He also states that "The man who is striving to solve a problem defined by existing knowledge and
technique is not... just looking around. He knows what he wants to achieve, and he designs his
instruments and directs his thoughts accordingly" (Kuhn 8). By following the rules to conduct a
scientific experiment, Man must not rely on past scientific breakthroughs as they can change over
time. Instead Men must find new scientific breakthroughs for a better understanding of the world
around them. Once there is a need for a paradigm shift, it is vital for Men to reject an old paradigm
and focus on the new one. In order to solve the anomalies created by the shift, men create new rules
and principals that can define it. Thus creating a new era of scientific understanding and being able
to move forward from the old

Scientific Revolution Religion
.
The Scientific Revolution
The Scientific Revolution means historical change in the minds and belief to change in social and
formal associations. This revolution began in Europe between 1500–1700. It started with Nicholas
Copernicus who stated a heliocentric (astronomical model) cosmos, and ended with Isaac Newton
who suggested universal law (principles and rules for governing human beings' conduct which are
most universal in their acceptability, their applicability, translation, and philosophical basis) and a
Mechanical Universe(theory that the universe is best understood as a system composed entirely of
matter in motion under a complete and regular system of laws). Some historians have a different
idea of when this revolution started and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Due to the implementation of continuous mistreatment of the people, the designers created multiple
movements that would be used to explain some establishments. The trend of faithful impressions
overthrown finding by the truthfulness resumed to manage. However, the understanding was
increasingly gaining popularity. Some of the advanced formed some movement groups incorporated
in confidentiality such as the illuminati of Bavaria. The illuminati were a network of the most
knowledgeable associate of the population and often prosperity one who had some ownership of
secrets and techniques for construction .
The church blamed such groups of presumption the devilish approaches and selling their souls to the
devil while the one thing that they did was coming up with the most successful methods of
construction and using them in their daily life. Despite the offers to manage the scientific revolution
the sightless belief in the religion was guided to a termination by the scientific revolution.
Eventually the people began searching for reasonable interpretation to all the things that they were
evaluating. Suddenly, the impression that the gods were above all phenomenons began losing
companionship in the population. The mistreatment of the creators and scientist terminated and all
of a sudden, they were admired

Scientific Revolution DBQ
The Scientific Revolution was a period of the development of the new and modern theories of
science and universe. This development took place from 16th century to 17th century. This concept
was widely accepted by the people of Europe. This period changed the beliefs which were not
accurate and changed the status of women in the society. Many scientists, such as Nicolas
Copernicus, Johannes Kepler and Sir Issac Newton changed the European history with the help of
new discoveries and knowledge and disagreement with the Catholic Church.
Scientific Revolution was a turning point in the European history because it challenged the Catholic
Church and its authority. Scientists like Copernicus challenged the theories of the church about
universe that Earth centered the Solar System "Geocentric Theory" (Doc 6) and replaced it with the
accurate and true theories about universe that Sun centered the Solar System "Heliocentric Theory".
Scientists reshaped church's beliefs about Spiritual things in the universe (Doc 1). There were only
heavenly bodies in the universe like Sun, Moon, Plants and Stars. Scientific Revolution changed the
status of Women. Women were sharing their ideas and reason's for things and played a important
role in the Scientific Revolution. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Kepler Discovered that all planets move around Sun in ellipses and they cover equal distance in
same interval of time (Doc 5). Kepler also discovered the structure of the Solar System and orbital
properties of planets with the help of Sir Issac Newton but church disagreed with Kepler because
church's beliefs state that every thing in the universe is motionless (Doc 2). Scientific Revolution
also changed the political and the social world by changing the beliefs and challenging the church's
authority. Church had no powers because parliament was the house of

Absolutism In 18th Century Europe
Much of modern Europe started to develop since the eighteenth century. A big stepping–stone in
forming modern cultural, political, and economic was the scientific revolution and the
enlightenment period. Both periods were important, because it started to provoke people to think
and write in a different way that later on became the main ideas of the enlightenment era. During the
scientific revolutions the establishment of scientific unions, experimental method development, and
experimentation, further open the minds of scientist. Furthermore, philosophers look at the world in
a different way, from more angles, which challenged the idea of absolutism and later shaped the
cultural, political, and economic life of the eighteenth century Europe.
The scientific revolution ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The uprising of thinkers and philosophers was a direct consequence of the scientific revolution. John
Locke and Georges–Louis Buffon were two thinkers linked that linked the scientific revolution and
enlightenment period. During the enlightenment age the structure of the cultural, political, and
economic life of Europeans changed through the views of nature, mankind, society, government and
the intrinsic value of freedom. Followers of the enlightenment believed that the law should rule
citizens, the government should have divided powers and not one holly ruler, and the government
should be concerned with the welfare of the population. These ideas had a great impact on the
political structure of the government and reforms started to take action. In modern day government
law we see many of the similar ideas that were thought during the enlightenment, like the power of
the government should be divided, and that the people should be rules by law and not a single

Evaluating Kuhn´s Theory of Scientific Development Essay
Introduction
The scientific revolution started in the 16th and 17th century with development of the scientific
theories (Hatch, n.d.). These Scientific theories are detailed explanation of some aspect of the
natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly duplicated through observation and
experimental procedures. The understanding or the attempt to understand the human's perspective of
the world through scientific theories is the birth to the philosophy of science (Okasha, 2002).
Several perspectives of scientific theories have been postulated by many on the history and
philosophy of science. One of such is the Kuhn theory of science development postulated by
Thomas Kuhn. His theory brought about a new perspective where ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Each paradigm starts as a normal science which goes through consensus verification by the science
community through scientific analysis, constructive criticism and scientific induction. Kuhn view is
clearly illustrated in his book the structure of scientific revolution. He traced the origin of his thesis
to a moment in 1947 when he was working toward a doctorate in physics at Harvard. James B.
Conant, the chemist who was the president of the university, had asked him to teach a class in
science for undergraduates majoring in the humanities (The Guardian, 2012). The lecture at the time
was on the history and development of science. While understudying Aristotle's Physics, he realized
how his concepts of motion were different from Newton's concepts of motion and matter.
Thomas Kuhn in his scientific model breaks down the history of development of science into three
stages which include normal of science, accumulation of anomaly and then the paradigm shift
(Kuhn, 1996). The normal period of science starts with the creation of an accepted boundary for
scientific findings by the science community called the paradigm. This paradigm provides objective
tools used by scientist to solve scientific problem thereby creating theories that fit within the
boundaries. Following this is the period of natural testing of the paradigm and expanding the
paradigm boundaries to

Essay on The Scientific Revolution
There were three major revolutions at work during the sixteenth through the eighteenth centuries,
the scientific revolution, the enlightenment revolution and the political revolution. All of these
revolutions have shaped western thought and ideals to this day and continue even in this age to
shape western thoughts and ideals. What brought us to our thinking of today? Which, if any of the
three, were the most important in shaping our thoughts on science, politics, and our social
structures? Or were each an independent revolution without consequences on the others? The
scientific revolution and the change in thought that it produced was the foundation for the
enlightenment revolution, and in turn the enlightenment revolution was the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
He came up with multiple mathematical laws, with the integral one being the law of universal
gravitation. Two other very important people in the progress of the scientific revolution were Francis
Bacon (1561–1626) and Rene Descartes (1596–1650). Bacon formalized the empirical method, also
known as empiricism. Empiricism is the theory of inductive reasoning that calls for acquiring
evidence through observation and experimentation rather than reason and speculation. Descartes'
theory was Cartesian dualism. Descartes thought that you should doubt everything that could be
doubted and then use deductive reasoning from self–evident principles to understand scientific laws.
Both of these men's theories make up the modern scientific method. (McKay, 2009, pp. 493–499)
The enlightenment was heavily influenced by the scientific revolution. So much so that two of its
three core concepts are the use of reason and the scientific method, along with progress. The new
world view brought about by the scientific revolution brought people to believe that the same
principles could be used to ascertain all aspects of life. Enlightenment thinkers believed if they
could define the laws of human existence they could better their societies and therefore better the
people. People began to question the unquestioned beliefs based

The Importance of the Structure of Dna
Ka Zhu
The Importance of the Structure of DNA Understanding ideas at a macroscopic scale is simple.
Looking at a clock, observing and understanding the movements of the hands over the numbered
surface are, in essence, all one requires to use the device. In order for innovation to occur, it is
imperative to understand the inner workings of the device on a microscopic scale to modulate its
properties. Such is the case for many innovations in science, from the heat engine to penicillin, and
is no different for biological advancements. Like the seed of a plant, the understanding of the
structure of DNA constitutes the basis of all life, establishing a foundation upon which explanations
of increasing complexity can be developed. In the eyes ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Although it is clear that the discovery of the structure of DNA was not a Kuhnian Revolution, the
information is still a crucial part of the foundation of biology and human understanding of their
surroundings. Naturally, humans exist in a dimension where they acknowledge their surroundings
with the help of the naked eye. With physics, humans are able to venture to a macroscopic
dimension of enormous celestial bodies enveloped in vast, seemingly endless space to interpret the
behaviour of their surroundings in addition to what was currently known. The discovery of the
structure of DNA enabled humans to venture into a new dimension to further extend their
understanding of the world to microscopic elements. Not only does the new dimension allow for the
development of scientific explanations for the behaviour of organisms, but it also grants humans the
knowledge and power to manipulate their surroundings at a new microscopic dimension, thus
allowing them to advance civilization in a completely new frontier.
Before the major discovery with DNA, there were merely simple observations and
conceptualizations of observable biological phenomena (Schrödinger,

Scientific Revolution
Kuhn used the "Chemical Revolution" as one of his primary examples of a scientific revolution and
based on what was read and discussed in class, I agree with Kuhn's analysis. Historical examples of
Kuhn's account of the chemical revolution in the Structure of Scientific Revolution are exemplified
in the Phlogiston theory, its period as a paradigm, point of normal science, and eventually the
theory's abandonment for Lavoisier's discovery of oxygen as a point of Scientific Revolution.
In Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolution, he presents that science is a cycle that has a paradigm,
which begins with a period of normal science, a crisis, revolution, then a paradigm change.
In regards to Kuhn's SSR, the phlogiston theory can be defined as ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Lavoisier disavowed the phlogiston theory and paradigm through his memoir, insisting that the
phlogiston theory was unclear. Lavoisier describes the situation as he states in his Memoirs that "the
majority of metallic calces are not to be reduced, that is, returned to the metallic state, without the
immediate contact of a carbonaceous material or any substance whatsoever containing what we call
phlogiston" and "therefore the fact that this fluid is obtained as fied air gives us no right to conclude
that it existed in this form in the metallic calx before its combination with the carbon" (Lavoisier
164). Lavoisier declared that "in attacking here Stahl's doctrine my object is not to substitute a
rigorously demonstrated theory but solely a hypothesis which appears to me more probable, more
comfortable to the laws of nature, and which appears to me to contain fewer forced explanations and
fewer contradictions" (Lavoisier 173). He is declaring that his discovery of oxygen is more
legitimate than Stahl's (also the phlogiston paradigm) theory of phlogiston. Lavoisier grew support
when he released his remarks opposing the phlogiston theory (Perrin 47). Furthermore, other
experiments were conducted on the basis of the phlogiston theory, and complications arose from
this. Experimenters were seeing that the theory had some complications when they conducted
experiment, producing incompatible effects than the theory had suggested (Perrin). Also, the release
of the Method of Chemical Nomenclature, released in 1787 by Lavoisier, Guyton de Morveau,
Fourcroy & Berthollet, that allowed for Lavoisier's scientific theories to be accepted and utilized

Western Civilization
Western Civilization from 1589 to 1914 had many specific changes that contributed to the structure
of the western world before World War I. In the absolutism state sovereignty is embodied in the
person of the ruler. Kings were absolute kings and were resposible to no none except god. In the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries absolute rulers had to respect the fundamental laws of their
land. They had to control competing jurisdictions, institutions or groups that were interested in their
territory. They regulated religious sects. France of Louis was the classic model of absolutism. Louis
XIV, " the sun king," was a devoted Catholic who believed that god had estalblished kings as rulers
on the earth. The French language and culture became ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Also, another idea was progress the creation of better societies and better people is possible. Many
writers made scientific thought understandable to an unscientific audience thus creating the
emergence of enlightenment. Enlightenment was key because it created a new world order. It helped
people do things that they might not have noticed before. The expansion of Europe in the eighteenth
century and the changing way of life in the eighteenth century also helped mold the western society.
The population began to explode in the eighteenth century in Europe. There had to be limitations on
population. Some things that helped the population were famine, disease and war. The reason
population was growing so much was mainly because the plague had just ended. The cottage
industry also with the population in the eighteen century. By this time the cottage industry
challenged the monopoly of the urban craft industry. There was a lot of healthy people because of
the plague had ended. There was a lot of working people because of the cottage industry. The
eighteenth century was good to Europe. Of all the effects on western life none were greater then the
effects of the revolutions of France and America. The American Revolution was fought from 1775–
1789. The British wanted Americans to share the imperial expenses. The Americans did not like that
so they fought for there freedom and they won. They won their independence. America's

The Invention Of The Scientific Revolution Essay
The concept of revolutions in science has been debated by historians and philosophers for decades;
especially the notion that there was a singular idiosyncratic Scientific Revolution. Despite this, most
historians will refer to the Scientific Revolution as spanning approximately the sixteenth century to
the end of the eighteenth century. This period displayed a rise in inductive reasoning, and can also
be seen as an epistemological revolution, where scientific discoveries were being based on
experimental research, as opposed to the traditional philosophy and faith. The importance of the
Scientific Revolution can be attributed to the coincidental multidisciplinary breakthroughs made
during the Revolution, which fundamentally transformed societal views of the natural world.
Finally, philosophers such as Georg Hegel and Thomas Kuhn have been able to use systematic
methodology introduced in the Scientific Revolution to validate their models of progress;, more
specifically, scientific progress. The Scientific Revolution was the beginning of the Modern Age, as
it was the paradigm shift from the traditional, ancient world science, to the empirical and rational
modern science. To start, it is important to understand the influence of the traditional sciences on the
development of modern scientific theories. The works of great philosophers like Plato, Aristotle and
Archimedes laid a foundational understanding for modern mathematics and sciences, continued by

The Contributions Of Science And Science
As a contemporary writer observing the timeline of modern science, and all the abridgments made to
it over the past few centuries, one cannot help but ponder upon the course that science took to reach
what it is today. We are aware of the pioneers of science such as Newton, Lavoisier, Stahl, Joule,
Maxwell, Einstein etc, and all of the groundbreaking contributions these extraordinary individuals
made to mould science into what we today know it to be. Over the course of History of Science, we
have examined the various factors influencing the life and work of various men of science, and how
the society, polity and religion of their time affected their contributions to science. We began with
the classical elegance of Newtonian Enlightenment, drifted onto the chaotic happenings of the
Industrial Revolution, glanced past the Romantic Movement and finally came upon the Einsteinian
revelation. Through the course of the 300 or so years the aforementioned periods encompassed, we
have seen scientific theories envisioned, published, critiqued, lauded and destroyed. Time is our
witness as we analyze the many edits made to the holy text of science, and keeping in mind the
irony of the previous sentence , I attempt to answer the question, "Is Modern Science a result of a
few abrupt revolutions, or is it a carefully cumulative accumulation of knowledge"?
I begin with a brief introduction as to what is meant by "revolution, "scientific revolution,
"revolutionary theories" in the context

Similarities Between Falsification And Structure Of...
Science is constantly evolving and acquiring new knowledge (Sutton 2015). Over time the
ideological, political and social aspects of Science have changed (Chalmers 1999). Additionally, the
definition and practice of Science have undergone change and are recognised in Philosophy of
Science (Chalmers 1999). The three prominent Philosophies of Science include: Positivism,
Falsification and the Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chalmers 1999). However, this essay will
not focus on Positivism and will only briefly mention the similarities between Falsification and
Structure of Scientific revolutions. Popper (Falsification) and Kuhn's (Structure of Scientific
Revolutions) scientific accounts differ greatly, but they are not without their similarities (Chalmers
1999). Firstly, both Kuhn and Popper distance themselves from the inductive theories of Positivism
(Chalmers 1999). Secondly, both prefer theory over observation, and finally both emphasise the
importance of theoretical and historical frameworks in the interpretation, rejection and acceptance of
results obtained during experimentation (Chalmers 1999). The Philosophy of Science associated
with Kuhn is the Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Clark 1993; Chalmers 1999). According to
Kuhn, Science progresses through phases of "normal science" to phases ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
However, the status of Science is often embellished leading to refutation of disciplines as scientific,
due to their 'dependence' on Science (Schiffer 2013). Furthermore, Science is influenced by
theoretical frameworks, and therefore somewhat affected by human subjectivity (Wylie 1989; Clark
1993; Huffman 2004; Johnson 2010). However, Science is universal and the effect of theoretical
frameworks does not hinder the validity of reliability of scientific knowledge (Wylie 1989;
Chalmers 1999).
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ARCHAEOLOGY AND

The Normative Structure Of Science
In his essay "The Normative Structure of Science," originally published in 1949 and later
anthologized in The Sociology of Science in 1973, the sociologist Robert Merton claimed that
science was inherently a social act. He did so by contending that scientists were dependent on a
social structure and as such were bound by what he termed the "ethos of science" (Merton, 1973, p.
268). These ethos represent the internalized values and norms that form the scientific conscience.
Included in these ethos were those of communism, organized skepticism, universalism, and
disinterestedness. Under the ethos of communism all findings of science are "a product of social
collaboration and are assigned to the community" (p. 273) with "the scientist's claim to his
intellectual property limited to that of recognition and esteem" (p.273). This ethos is largely
considered the foundation of the claim of science as a social act as it both eschews secrecy and
recognizes the scientist's "dependence upon a cultural heritage to which they lay no differential
claim" (p.274). However, the other ethos equally support the social reality of science through
mandates of the community. The community is to ensure the quality of scientific work through the
ethos of organized skepticism, which requires all scientists to maintain, "detached scrutiny of beliefs
in terms of empirical and logical criteria" (p. 270) in the review of all claims until adequately
proven. Ensuring fairness of such judgement, the

Khn's Reflections On My Critics
3.1 Kuhn's Reflections on his Critics In his paper Reflections on my Critics Kuhn defended his view
of science against the criticisms raised at London Colloquium. He observed that the criticisms were
mainly focused on four points: methodology, normal science, paradigm change, and the nature of
paradigms. Kuhn believed that most of his critics misunderstood his description of scientific
development, and hence he sought to clarify his position further. Kuhn noted that his critics claimed
that his method is historical, descriptive, and relies on social psychology, whereas their own method
is logical and normative. He defended his position by affirming that both of his view and his critics'
rely on historical case studies and observations on scientific behaviour. The only difference is that
he, contrary to his critics, began as an historian of science to construct a theory of scientific
knowledge. "I am no less concerned with rational reconstruction, with the discovery of essentials,
than are philosophers of science. My objective, too, is an understanding of science, of the reasons
for its special efficacy, of the cognitive status of its ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
For example, in theory–choice situations, shared commitments decisively influence the scientific
group's behaviour and factors such as personality, education, and past experience play a role in
dictating individual's choice. Finally, Kuhn contended that his view of science involves normative
implications: "The structure of my argument is simple and, I think, unexceptionable: scientists
behave in the following ways; those modes of behaviour have (here theory enters) the following
essential functions; in the absence of an alternate mode that would serve similar functions, scientists
should behave essentially as they do if their concern is to improve scientific

The Theory Of A Paradigm Shift
Traditionally, the scientific community viewed progress developing cumulatively within a
framework of accepted facts. However in The Structure of Scientific Revolution, Thomas S. Kuhn
argues science also advances episodically rather than only continuously. Kuhn creates the concept of
paradigm shifts that changed science by transforming fundamental structures. Although Kuhn only
attributes paradigms shifts to natural sciences, many have applied this idea to other fields. In
Discipline and Punish, Michel Foucault analyzes the rapid shifts in penal systems and the larger
social implications of such change. Foucault attributes the rise of prisons due to modifications in
perceptions about punishment and power. These reformations mirror paradigm shifts, since they
fundamentally change existing frameworks. Both Kuhn and Foucault demonstrate the importance of
structural changes in the history of ideas. To prove this claim, I will explain Kuhn's idea of a
paradigm shift and relate it to Foucault's analysis of how modern prisons emerged. In order to
understand paradigm shifts, one must look at normal science and how its impact on the scientific
community. Kuhn defines normal science as "research firmly based upon one or more past scientific
achievements, achievements that some particular scientific community acknowledges for a time as
supplying the foundation for its further practice" (Kuhn 10). Normal science builds facts and
knowledge within a set of guidelines, or paradigms.

The Structure Of Scientific Revolution By Thomas Kuhn
Thomas Kuhn 's seminal book The Structure of Scientific Revolution was first published in 1962
and in just a little more than half century its influence on science and impact on other fields has been
anything but influential. The Structure has even alleviated "right up there with the usual suspect,
namely the Bible and Freud." Essentially the Structure purpose is to reconstruct the image of science
and its development and to deconstruct the received view, which paints the picture of science as
stockpiling of facts and progressing linearly, in a cumulative manner and ever marching toward the
ultimate truth. Yet, as an alternative view, Kuhn guides the reader to reconsider such misleading
image of development of science. The reconstruction of this peculiar image includes the progress
through normal science, the process by which interrupted by anomaly and this lead to the invention
of new theory and in return brought about new paradigm shift and ultimately leads to scientific
revolution. In the meantime, although he does not deny scientific knowledge is cumulative but the
radical shift from one dominate theory to another where revolution is at the center destroys such
picture of continuity due to two successive theories being incommensurable and incompatible. As a
result of this shift, Kuhn argues that a theory choice––which may or may not take long period of
time––achieved not merely through logic and experimentation but what persuades scientists is the
external factors or

Political Impacts Of The French Revolution
During the 16th through 18th centuries, European civilization experienced big changes to its social,
political, and economic structures. A break from the Middle Ages began during the Scientific
Revolution when respected thinkers of the time began to explore new possibilities, such as the
likelihood of a sun–centered universe instead of an earth–centered one. The Enlightenment was an
intellectual and cultural movement that pointed out the danger of unchecked authority and
concentrated on values of law, reason, humanity, and religious toleration. The French Revolution
represented a broad wave of political changes and democratic ideas that splashed France, and
subsequently, all of Europe. The Industrial Revolution changed the way people lived ... Show more
After Tycho's death, his assistant, young mathematician Johannes Kepler used Tycho's observations
and came up with his First Law that orbits of the planets are elliptical instead of round like
Copernicus believed. With his Second Law, Kepler stated that the speed of the planets depends on
their distance from the sun which helped English astronomer and physicist Isaac Newton, to come
up with his Law of Universal Gravitation.
Galileo Galilei built a telescope in 1609, and he studied the night sky, observing the earthlike
features of the Moon, moons orbiting Jupiter, and sun spots. He published his work, which later
earned him a trial by the church and a house arrest for life. "According to a story that began to
circulate shortly afterward, as he left the court for house arrest he stamped his foot and muttered
deﬁantly, looking down at the earth: Still, it moves" (page 530, Chapter 16). Francis Bacon and
René Descartes established standards of practice and scientific evidence, and they were true
believers in human thinking. Physician, William Harvey contributed to science by observing
dissected living animals and experimented on himself that the blood circulates in our bodies through
veins, heart, and arteries. Inventor and experimenter Robert Hooke introduced microscope into the
laboratory and studied the structure of plants on the cellular level. Isaac Newton gave us laws of
motion, universal gravity, the reflecting telescope, optic theories,

Sciencentific Revolution
Sciencentific Revolution
Name: Rayko Vinicius de Almeida Jankowski
Class: World History
Grade: 9
Teacher: Ms. Antonini
Date: 21.03
Of all the changes that swept in the 16th and 17th centuries, the most widely influential was the
Scientific Revolution. This revolution often is associated with various scientific and technological
changes made during this time. However, the Scientific Revolution was also about changes in the
way Europeans looked at themselves and their world.
A revolution in medicine began in the 16th century. During this time Andreas Vesalius and William
Harvey added to the understanding of human anatomy. By dissecting human bodies at the
University of Padua, Vesalius described the individual organs and general structure ... Show more
She was not formally educated in the sciences. However, Cavendish wrote a number of books on
scientific matters, including Observations Upon Experimental Philosophy. In this work, Cavendish
was especially critical of the growing belief that humans, through science, were the masters of
Nature. Her contribution to philosophy is widely recognized today, but many intellectuals of the
time did not take her seriosly.
In Germany many of the women who were involved in science were astronomers. These women had
received the opportunity to become astronomers from working in family observatories where their
father or husbands trained them. Between 1650 and 1710 women made up 14% of all German
astronomers.
The most famous female astronomer in Germany was Maria Winkelmann. She received training in
astronomy from a self–taught astronomer. When she married Gottfried Kirch, Prussia's foremost
astronomer, she became his assistant and began to pratice astronomy. Winkelmann made some
orginal contributions to astronomy, inclunding the discovery of a assistans astronomer at the Berlin
Academy. Marie Winkelmann was highly qualified, but as a women with no university degree she
was denied the post. Members on the Berlin Academy feared that they would set bad example by
hiring a

The Development Of Astronomy During The Scientific Revolution
The Development in Astronomy During the Scientific Revolution
Daniel Huffman
World History and Geography II
Mr. Struck
December 8, 2016
Astronomy, the field pertaining to the study of space and the objects that exist within it, is a
constantly developing science. Beginning in ancient times, humans would rely on astronomy to
observe the positions of the moon and stars in order to measure time and direction ("Astronomy",
sec. 1). Up until the mid–16th century, the widespread belief among Europeans was that the stars
and other celestial bodies orbit the Earth, a theory established by the astronomer Ptolemy (Furlong
80). With the limited technology available at their time, Ptolemy's geocentric theory was left largely
untested, at least until the dawn of the Scientific Revolution. During the Scientific Revolution, a
period of several hundred years where science developed to greater resemble our modern practices
rather than the more religious and philosophical mindset of the time prior, notable scientists such as
Galileo, Copernicus, and Newton made major discoveries in fields such as astronomy. This
revolution started with the development of Copernicus' heliocentric theory of the structure of the
solar system, which directly contradicted the accepted beliefs of the time ("Scientific Revolution").
In the beginning of the 17th century, Galileo designed and constructed an improved telescope, which
he used to make significant astronomical discoveries that

The Theory Of Scientific Revolutions
In my essay I plan to argue that Thomas Kuhn was incorrect when he presented his theory that no
paradigm is better than any other paradigm and how he believed that people who occupy different
paradigms are in different universes, in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. I believe
that there is no valid deductive or inductive support for incommensurability, there are examples
against it throughout the history of science that do not exhibit the discontinuity and replacement of
paradigms, as Kuhn's incommensurability thesis predicts, but rather continuity and supplementation.
If this is correct, then there are no compelling epistemic reasons to believe that Kuhn's
incommensurability thesis is true or probable. The argument that the point of the same kind terms
changes or ceases from one theoretical context to another, it does not fundamentally mean that these
two abstract frameworks are taxonomically or methodologically incommensurable. Kuhn's theory
takes a relativist stance and uses it to make all theories and paradigms equal with none being better
than the other. This poses a major problem because the hope of scientific research is best said as
"For a realist conception of scientific progress also wishes to assert that, by and large, later science
improves on earlier science, in particular by approaching closer to the truth." This means that all
realist scientist hope that by advancing our scientific knowledge we will eventually come closer to
the truth about

The Scientific Revolution Of The Human History Essay
Scientific Revolution: An
Important Event in the Human History
The moments when I write these words are history, so we could say history deals with the past.
However, the past has not passed completely. The future will also be history. History is a very
dynamic notion and concept. What is history is really hard to define. Change is central to history.
Yet, history is not only about details. There are certain things that demonstrate true history. These
events have varied in time and space. Among them are the Agricultural Revolution, the founding of
Greek Philosophy, the first Sumerian city–state, the scientific revolution, Renaissance, and the
Industrial Revolution. It would be extremely hard to select one of these events as the most
influential. Yet, there is always a choice to make. I would say that the Scientific Revolution is the
most important event in history. There are a number of reasons that pertain to this conclusion. The
first reason is that it gave the humans a new outlook towards their place in the universe. Another
reason lies in the fact that the Scientific Revolution destroyed the older social structures. One more
aspect pertaining to this conclusion is that the Scientific Revolution opened the way for females to
raise their voices and challenge patriarchy.
The monotheistic religions, such as Christianity, Islam and Judaism taught humanity that the earth
was at the center of the universe. This somehow gave humans a type of arrogance; they gave them
the idea

Scientific Structures
An Analysis on Scientific Structures In recent times, there have been three individuals who have
provided their interpretations on that structures of science. Thomas Kuhn developed the idea of
paradigms, which are nested concepts for looking at the world, and later would propose the idea
paradigm shifts for what he called the Kuhn Cycle. Following Kuhn's work, Imre Lakatos and Larry
Laudan created their own analysis on scientific structures using Kuhn's work as a base for their own.
Lakatos and Laudan both attempted to rationalize and improve on Kuhn's work. In this essay, I will
attempt to analyze the differences in Kuhn's work as compared to Lakatos and Laudan and explain
which account of scientific structures is the most persuasive to believe in. Paradigms are really just
conceptual frameworks through which we interpret the world. In this case, Kuhn applies the concept
of paradigms to the sciences to create the Kuhn Cycle. The ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
One interpretation of the Kuhn Cycle depends on how one views the concept of incommensurability,
which is the concept that standards of evalution such as rules or laws change or even shift from
generation to generation and cannot be compared to one another. With a strong interpretation of
incommensurability, knowledge is relative to each paradigm and as a result it becomes difficuilt to
figure out if science truly makes progress. There is no reason to prefer one paradigm as being
superior to another. With a weak interpretation of incommensurability, science does make progress
as knowledge increases and is not relative. The fact that Kuhn relies on the concept of
incommensurability in order to save his account of the structure of sciences is enough to prove that
his account is not reliable. His account is the byproduct of a historical paradigm; therefore, its truth
value will depend on one's interpretation of incommensurability. If so, how can we really say Kuhn's
account is

Thomas Kuhn
An Analysis of Section III of Thomas S. Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Karl Popper argues that theories cannot be considered scientific if they do not leave any room for
the possibility of being false (P.O.S. 473–474). He argues that scientists must strive to prove
themselves wrong rather than right, because while there may be a hundred pieces of 'evidence' to
support a theory, it only takes one to knock the entire idea to the ground. Thomas Kuhn disagrees
with this generalization based on the argument that how science should be done is very different
than how it is done and that scientists very rarely try to prove their theories false. Instead, Kuhn
presents science not linear or cumulative as Popper suggests, but rather ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
There are terms used in which their given definitions lack clarification and consistency. His
definition of paradigm, as defined in section II for example, essentially states that it is a theory that
is unique and intriguing enough to attract enough supporters and that it leaves a significant amount
of questions (P.O.S. 490). Later on in the section, he defines it simply as a theory that "seems better
than its competitors" (Kuhn – P.O.S 491). Kuhn describes in section III, three 'foci' of normal
science. The first focus is a presentation of facts that through normal science, has been determined
to describe something's nature within the paradigm (P.O.S. 492). However, just a few paragraphs
later Kuhn admits that in reality, there are very few instances when a paradigm can actually be
compared with nature (P.O.S. 493). This presents an issue in the applicability of his theory
especially in the more theoretical or mathematical sciences. In this sense, normal science cannot
work in these disciplines without making often inexact and unobservable estimations within which
to work with (P.O.S. 493). This defect is emphasized by Popper, who stresses the use of deductive
reasoning. Deductive reasoning states that if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true;
consequently, if the conclusion is true, then the premises must be true. Because of this, any
conclusion drawn from the use

Italy During The Scientific Revolution And The...
The growth of the western countries resulted in trading, more military power, colonization,
production of goods and more advanced technology. The Renaissance in Italy was a political
evolution of the City–States that was eventually turned into urban centers. Italy was the first country
to be modernized and start the Renaissance. The Scientific Revolution was a big era in Western's
history. This era brought new technology, higher performances from Greek philosophers and
experimentation on the world. The Enlightenment period was the time for reform and reason. The
Renaissance, Scientific Revolution and Enlightenment era all had similarities, differences and major
impacts on Western's history, but by far the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment was the
most beneficial back then and even now. "The Renaissance then brought advances in invention, the
arts, and a revival of citizenship; the Reformation unleashed individuality and free thinking about
God and nature; the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment then ushered in the ... Show more
The Catholic Church did not want to believe any of the philosophers, because it was not part of their
religion and if they did believe them that would be going against their religion which was a big deal.
When the philosophers did their research and experiments, it did not match the accepted truths of
what they had always claimed. One philosopher, Nicolas Copernicus, initiated that Earth as not the
center of the solar system, but concluded that the planets orbited the sun. Still the Catholic's did not
want to believe any of this because of traditional beliefs and Copernicus had little evidence of his
new idea. Later in the sixteenth century Galileo found the law of motions. The law of motions states
that gravity accelerates all objects toward the Earth at the same rate. Sir Isaac Newton works were
also famous. He made an understanding toward the law of universal

Significant Events Of The Scientific Revolution
The Scientific Revolution was a series of developments and advancements in topics such as
mathematics, physics, astronomy, and biology that occurred during the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries. This period in time helped change people's point of views and opinions about nature and
was a major turning point in Modern Western civilizations. The Scientific Revolution was
significant because of the the advancements made in the scientific field, contributions and
discoveries made concerning the medical field and the steps taken in support of women involvement
in science.
Beginning with Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543) and his heliocentric conception and ending with
Isaac Newton (1642–1727) and his proposal of Universal Laws and a mechanical universe, the
Scientific Revolution had many advancements in the scientific field. For example, Tycho Brahe kept
detailed records of his observations on the positions and movements of planets. This ultimately
helped Brahe make a significant contribution to the scientific field because he was able to create
detailed records of the solar system. Brahe's work is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Despite being criticised and ignored women continued to fight to be treated as equals and to be
allowed to be a part of a male dominated field and career. And excellent example of this is Maria
Merian. Merian was an important entomologist who in 1699 went on an expedition to the Dutch
colony of Suriname. There, she worked to collect and draw samples of plants and insect life. Merian
illustrated 60 drawings that depicted the reproductive and developmental cycles of Suriname's insect
life. Furthermore, Margaret Cavendish was a major influential figure of her time. She was critical of
the belief that through science humans would be the masters of nature. She practiced with
experimental philosophy and made observations about nature

Karl Popper The Enemy Of Certainty Analysis

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Nicole Fields

More from Nicole Fields (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Karl Popper The Enemy Of Certainty Analysis