OPENs up

Kuhn suggests X) Revolutions as Changes of World View : While people get slaughtered so that science#2 may go on as scientific revolutions, scientists see new and different things when looking with familiar instruments in places they have looked before. Familiar objects are seen in a different light and joined by unfamiliar ones as well. Scientists see new things when looking at old objects. In a sense, after a revolution, scientists are responding to a different world.

Why does a shift in view occur? Genius? Flashes of intuition? Sure. Because different scientists interpret their observations differently? No. Observations are themselves nearly always different. Observations are conducted within a paradigmatic framework, so the interpretative enterprise can only articulate a paradigm, not correct it . Because of factors embedded in the nature of human perception and retinal impression? No doubt, but our knowledge is simply not yet advanced enough on this matter says Kuhn, and science#2 would abhor it, for it comes from science#3! Changes in definitional conventions? No. Because the existing paradigm fails to fit? Always. Because of a change in the relation between the scientist's manipulations and the paradigm or between the manipulations and their concrete results? You bet. It is hard to make nature fit a paradigm. In fact it is impossible: MAT 5:18: "I assure you, until heaven and earth disappear, even the smallest detail of God's law will remain until its purpose is achieved ". However, scientists#2, in its own right, likes to waste life in making it strive for their impossible objectives!

top next stage