Talk:The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Structure of Scientific Revolutions article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1: 3 months

History of Science Mid‑importance

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Literature / Science / Contemporary High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Philosophy of science
	Contemporary philosophy

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

A summary of this article appears in Philosophy of science.

Model/Animation showing the model

It seems like an oversight to me that the actual model isn't listed anywhere in this text. I have an animation that could be used for this or a simple static image could be added. Either way, the main image should probably be the model, not the book cover. No? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awfominaya (talk • contribs) 15:20, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can't conceive how a model — to say nothing of an animated model — could contribute anything to a discussion of Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Perhaps you're thinking of his book The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought, which employed several diagrams .--SteveMcCluskey (talk) 02:37, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edition without the author?

Can we clarify why there is a fourth edition if the author wasn't alive to edit the book? Thank you! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 14:16, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed quote

An inaccurate quote was introduced in this edit in March 2016. Hairy Dude queried it this February and I've now confirmed that part of the quote was not from Kuhn. The edit introduced this sentence: "While the new paradigm is rarely as expansive as the old paradigm in its initial stages, it must nevertheless have significant promise for future problem-solving." It replaced this sentence in the real quote, to which it bears little resemblance: "Novelty for its own sake is not a desideratum in the sciences as it is in so many other creative fields." How odd. That burst of edits was all Ker64 contributed to Wikipedia. Fences&Windows 15:41, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a new study that tests the Kuhnian hypothesis

A new 2024 study published by the Royal Society tests Kuhn’s hypothesis of non-cumulative science and would be a nice addition to the “Kuhn on scientific progress” section. Can you include the following additional one or two sentences at the end of the ‘Kuhn on scientific progress’ section (and an additional citation below in the “Further reading” section at the very end of the article)?

A study of over 750 major scientific discoveries tests whether scientific progress is best explained by (paradigm-changing) revolution or (cumulative) evolution; it finds that only 1% of over 750 major discoveries have been subject to a paradigm shift, and that science overall evolves cumulatively by using three different measures of scientific progress (major discoveries, methods and fields).^[1]

“Further reading” section:

Krauss, Alexander (2024). Debunking revolutionary paradigm shifts: evidence of cumulative scientific progress across science. Proceedings of the Royal Society A. (480).^[2]

Paradigm Changes (talk) 09:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

^ Krauss, A. (2024). "Debunking revolutionary paradigm shifts: evidence of cumulative scientific progress across science". Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 480.
^ Krauss, A. (2024). "Debunking revolutionary paradigm shifts: evidence of cumulative scientific progress across science". Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 480.

[1] Krauss, A. (2024). "Debunking revolutionary paradigm shifts: evidence of cumulative scientific progress across science". Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 480.

[2] Krauss, A. (2024). "Debunking revolutionary paradigm shifts: evidence of cumulative scientific progress across science". Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 480.

[1]

[2]