Science as Consensus
One of the most important proponents of the "science as consensus"
view of knowledge has been Thomas Kuhn. He set forth his concept of
the scientific paradigm when he published, "The Structure of
Scientific Revolutions". For Kuhn, scientific paradigms include, "law,
theory, application, and instrumentation together -- [and] provide
models from which spring particular coherent traditions of scientific
research" (1, p. 10). The paradigm view of science pictures the
successful scientific community as a consensus group possessing a
paradigm with increasing professional acknowledgment. The concluding
analogy used to illustrate the process of choice between conflicting
views of nature (or paradigms) is evolutionary natural selection.
Science is advanced through, "conflict within the scientific community
of the fittest way to practice science" (1, p. 172). This view of
scientific discovery has three phases to its structure.
[First] is the pre-paradigm phase which is characterized by various
schools of thought vying for position but without sufficient
explanatory successes to their credit to gain preeminence. In this
phase the various paradigms are relatively vague and therefore new
observations can be accommodated because the paradigm's indefinite
form does not clearly demarcate what are acceptable or unacceptable
results. Discovery occurs as a result of the more or less random
observations made and utilized to formulate a more structured paradigm
view.
[Second] is the "normal-science" phase where a clearly demarcated
paradigm view has been established as most successful in the eyes of
the majority of scientists in that field. In this case research is
conducted for, "determination of significant facts, matching of facts
with theory, and articulation of theory" (1, p. 34). Discovery of
facts that do not fit into the paradigm view are not expected and when
"successful" none are found.
[Third] is the "revolutionary science" phase where the emergence of
anomalies begin to challenge the reigning paradigm view. In this case
researchers uncover certain facts that can not be fitted within the
more precise paradigm in a straight forward manner. Those anomalies
which stubbornly remain irreconcilable have the potential to become
what are called "revolutionary anomalies." A key to the next step is
described by Kuhn as a "period of pronounced professional insecurity"
due to the anomalies' stubborn refusal to be assimilated into the
existing paradigm (1, p. 83). This is only resolved when a choice is
made between the old and new paradigm. When this process of
"conversion" occurs it is then possible to recognize not only that
some fact has been discovered but also what the discovery of that fact
means in the context of the new paradigm world view. According to Kuhn
a decision like this is not ultimately made based on some objective
facts, but rather, "a decision of that kind can only be made on
faith" (1, p. 158).
http://www.thingsrevealed.net/structure.htm
http://tom.acrewoods.net/research/philosophy/science/kuhn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions
http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/Kuhn.html
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/kuhn.htm
