Philosophy › The 20th century › Analytic philosophy
Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
1962· Book or text· Knowledge, logic & science
Well documentedSolid records, texts or physical evidence.
Thomas Kuhn's 1962 book arguing that science advances through periodic revolutions in which one 'paradigm' replaces another.
See it on the Philosophy map →The idea
Idea: science does not grow by steady accumulation. Most of the time scientists do 'normal science', solving puzzles inside an accepted paradigm: a framework of theories, methods and model problems. Anomalies pile up until a crisis, then a revolution installs a new paradigm, as when Copernicus displaced Ptolemy or Einstein revised Newton. Rival paradigms are partly 'incommensurable', lacking a neutral yardstick. Main objection: critics, Popper and Imre Lakatos among them, said this made theory choice look like mob psychology rather than reason.
Why it matters
It made the history and sociology of science central to philosophy of science, and gave the world the phrase 'paradigm shift'.
Think of it like
Like retail's shift from malls to e-commerce: the old valuation rules stopped explaining the numbers, and a new framework took over wholesale.
Where it comes from
Published in 1962 in the International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, a series begun by the logical positivists; a 1969 postscript answered critics. It is among the most-cited academic books of the century.
Still debated
Kuhn later softened 'incommensurability'; whether his view makes science relativist, as some readers claimed and he denied, is still debated.
Connections (2)
▸Karl Popper and falsifiability was challenged by Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific RevolutionsWell documented
The connection
Popper held that scientists should always try to refute their theories and drop them when evidence goes against them. Kuhn's history showed scientists usually defend their paradigm, treating failures as puzzles to solve, and abandon it only in revolutions. To Popper this was dangerous; to Kuhn, it was how science actually works.
When and how
Bedford College, London, July 1965: the two debated at an international colloquium; the papers appeared in Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (1970), edited by Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave.
How we know
The 1970 volume records both sides, including Popper's reply, 'Normal Science and its Dangers'.
Debates and open questions
Lakatos tried to combine them with 'research programmes'; whether Kuhn describes how science works or how it should work remains disputed.
▸Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions reinterpreted The Scientific RevolutionWell documented
The connection
Kuhn's first book, The Copernican Revolution (1957), studied the move from an Earth-centered to a Sun-centered universe. He argued it was not a simple triumph of evidence: Copernicus's system was no more accurate at first, and the change brought new standards and worldviews. That case became his model of a paradigm shift.
When and how
Harvard, 1947, where Kuhn, a physics graduate student, read Aristotle's physics and realized it was a coherent worldview, not bad Newton.
How we know
Kuhn recounted the Aristotle episode in later essays, and both The Copernican Revolution (1957) and Structure (1962) use 16th- and 17th-century cases throughout.
Debates and open questions
Historians debate whether the Scientific Revolution was one revolution at all; many now see a gradual, patchy change, which complicates Kuhn's model too.