[lit-ideas] Re: No shock that report Einstein "may have been wrong" may have been wrong
- From: John McCreery <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 22:02:01 +0900
Walter asks,
If we find that there really is stuff that runs faster than the speed of
light,
is this discovery simply a new empirical fact about the universe we can add
to
the other ones, or does it constitute a "paradigm shift" in Kuhn's terms?
The answer is "No." It has been a long time since I read Kuhn, but as I
recall his argument no single finding, however major, would constitute a
paradigm shift, though it might stimulate one. Why? A paradigm is not a
theory. A paradigm is a way of doing science, a set of conventional
procedures. A theory may be invoked to provide a rationale for that set of
conventional procedures, and a finding that contradicts the theory may set
in motion changes in practice that alter the procedures in question. Then
again, it may not. The theory may be adjusted to account for the new finding
without fundamentally altering the way in which the scientists in question
go about doing science. This sort of adjustment is, moreover, commonplace in
what Kuhn calls the "normal science" phase of a science's development.
Of course, my memory could be failing me.
John
--
John McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
Tel. +81-45-314-9324
jlm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.wordworks.jp/
Other related posts:
