On Scientific Paradigm

arousal of paradigms
the creation of science

Okay, I’m a bit inspired by Khun. LOL
After nights of reading the book, it was worthwhile thiough I havent finished it.

Thomas S. Khun emphasized in his book “The Structure of Scientific Revolution” that a scientific community practices in reference to a set or rather sets of learned beliefs from accepted achievements or assumptions. And these beliefs become the foundation for learning and application. Paradigms are assumptions that contribute to the development of Normal Science, a research firmly based upon one or more past scientific achievements that some particular scientific community recognizes for the further research and practice, before a change or shift in paradigm occurs. These paradigms are being studied by students in order to gain membership to a certain scientific community. Basically the knowledge is being passed on to the students from their mentors, which may oftentimes lead to disagreement to basic principles due to student’s critical mindset or rather due to questions and inquiries formulated by them. However, researchers of the paradigm most often than not based their inquiries from the shared paradigm, and are committed to the rules and standards for the application of the certain paradigmic principles.

A paradigm is said to be of success and of having full potential to be of interest to scientists and scholars when it is a novelty rather a succeedent set of fundamentals based on another paradigm as a result of anomaly. From competition with a pre-paradigmic school, a paradigm emerges, especially when it seems to explain all facts which it was confronted with. Consequently pre-paradigms whose proponents never found their way out of the dilemma that they have been faced with, certainly entirely fades. This growing paradigm like an infant undergoes a process of development and within its development the more advocates it possesses, the greater is the probability for its strength to generate.

At its beginning a paradigm is limited in its scope and in precision, that is why mop-operations are relevant; and by which most researchers spend much of their time doing mopping. Thus, proceeding to more inquiries, and paradigm-based researching that “attempts to force nature into a pre-formed and relatively inflexible box that the paradigm supplies.” Anomalies usually happen but nobody seemed to have made effort to look for  anomalies since they are resticted and for those who tried to mostly were not tolerated. Sometimes the disadvantage of forcing nature to a box leads the paradigm to not function well that caused it to cease.

Researching, hence, is like solving puzzle that already has a fixed solution, thus discovering what was already known in advance. And when the result of what has already been anticipate (hypothesis) becomes null, and thereby, considered a failure. Because of the novel studies weren’t tolerated to compete with present beliefs, unexpected result in science happened.

A change in paradigm takes place as a result from discovery brought about by encounters with anomaly. And although Normal Science does not tolerate novelties, they are nonetheless challenged to pursue the belief, which would later on cause them to arise. Anomaly also excites the emergence of a change in an existing paradigm. This emergence occurs when a puzzle is being figured out. These failures are said to have been brought about by disparity and error between the new theory and the present fact.

The scientific revolution can be possible only if a novel theory is substituted to a present paradigm which occurring discrepancies doesn’t have a solution, thereby a failure, resulting in the denunciation of  the proponent for his disability to put the pieces of the puzzle back. And a paradigm shift, on the other hand is not considered a scientific revolution since it only based its inquiries on a particular paradigm. The assimilation of the new paradigm must be demanded them and the old paradigm be rejected. This is what scientific revolution means.

Indeed, progress in the fields of research and science became possible because of the structure of the past scientific methods and of course because of scientific revolution. Although there were lots of biases in the past, they became the tools for the development of science.


    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

    Google photo

    You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

    Connecting to %s

  • Twitter Update

    Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

  • Facebook Badge

  • My Services

    Jeel Christine's Services
  • My FriendFeed

    View my FriendFeed
  • Twitter Grade

  • My Bookmarks

%d bloggers like this: