Terms in this set (46)
a paradigm is replaced by another
this only occurs if there is a crisis within the old paradigm, giving possibility to scientific attention; the old paradigm is falsified when the shift happens since no one continues to take the old paradigm seriously; but (contrary to Popper), it can't be falsified before something new appears that MIGHT take its place
this only occurs if there is a crisis within the old paradigm, giving possibility to scientific attention; the old paradigm is falsified when the shift happens since no one continues to take the old paradigm seriously; but (contrary to Popper), it can't be falsified before something new appears that MIGHT take its place
new paradigms cannot be evaluated in any more specific or precise way, since paradigms provide the standards for any precise evaluations
the idea that different paradigms encode different and incompatible specific principles for handling evidence and evaluating hypotheses
the paradigms are "incommensurable" in the sense that there is no neutral standard by which paradigms can be compared
thus, someone working in the new paradigm will be able to say why his/her view is superior, but that will not seem compelling to someone in a different paradigm that has different epistemic standards
the idea that different paradigms encode different and incompatible specific principles for handling evidence and evaluating hypotheses
the paradigms are "incommensurable" in the sense that there is no neutral standard by which paradigms can be compared
thus, someone working in the new paradigm will be able to say why his/her view is superior, but that will not seem compelling to someone in a different paradigm that has different epistemic standards
the meaning of a term only has meaning within that context; a term from one paradigm does not mean the same thing in another paradigm
Kuhn thinks that it is irrational to abandon a paradigm for another paradigm is irrational for this reason; the "term" that one is using to convince someone from another paradigm doesn't mean the same thing so there shouldn't be any convincing that happens
Kuhn thinks that it is irrational to abandon a paradigm for another paradigm is irrational for this reason; the "term" that one is using to convince someone from another paradigm doesn't mean the same thing so there shouldn't be any convincing that happens