Specify Containing Books The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
| Title | : | The Structure of Scientific Revolutions |
| Author | : | Thomas S. Kuhn |
| Book Format | : | Paperback |
| Book Edition | : | 3rd |
| Pages | : | Pages: 226 pages |
| Published | : | 1996 by University of Chicago Press (first published 1962) |
| Categories | : | Science. Philosophy. Nonfiction. History. Sociology. History Of Science. Classics |
Thomas S. Kuhn
Paperback | Pages: 226 pages Rating: 4.01 | 21447 Users | 1092 Reviews
Description Supposing Books The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Thomas S. Kuhn's classic book is now available with a new index.
"A landmark in intellectual history which has attracted attention far beyond its own immediate field. . . . It is written with a combination of depth and clarity that make it an almost unbroken series of aphorisms. . . . Kuhn does not permit truth to be a criterion of scientific theories, he would presumably not claim his own theory to be true. But if causing a revolution is the hallmark of a superior paradigm, [this book] has been a resounding success." —Nicholas Wade, Science
"Perhaps the best explanation of [the] process of discovery." —William Erwin Thompson, New York Times Book Review
"Occasionally there emerges a book which has an influence far beyond its originally intended audience. . . . Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions . . . has clearly emerged as just such a work." —Ron Johnston, Times Higher Education Supplement
"Among the most influential academic books in this century." —Choice
One of "The Hundred Most Influential Books Since the Second World War," Times Literary Supplement
Be Specific About Books Conducive To The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
| Original Title: | The Structure of Scientific Revolutions |
| ISBN: | 0226458083 (ISBN13: 9780226458083) |
| Edition Language: | English |
Rating Containing Books The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Ratings: 4.01 From 21447 Users | 1092 ReviewsEvaluate Containing Books The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
I can understand why the author thanked his family for their consideration of the author's efforts towards this book, as it must have demanded a lot of painstaking effort not to mention time. I would have given it 3 stars for its complicated way of delivering its points; the language is highly complex that it tends at many certain points throughout, that the arguments contradict each other. Five stars, however for its complexity and taken as a whole it is actually coherent. Like the choiceBit of a preface: I hated this book. It contains some really good ideas, which are totally worth discussing, but the whole thing is so much wordier and denser than it needs to be (this, coming from me!); seriously, the ideas put forth in this 200-page monstrosity would have been better shared in a 5-10 page article. Still, we were assigned to read it for LIS 2000, Understanding Information, and asked to write a 400-word review, describing "how the content of this book relates to the information
Kuhn hit on an interesting idea. Sometimes new discoveries lead to a foundational crisis. The foundation in an area of science come into question and that is when the view of the world changes. I don't think it is so much that science goes through periods of suppressing anomalies while it solves puzzles merely that some puzzles hit the bedrock of unexamined assumptions and revising assumptions can be a messy business. the Twentieth Century examples of Relativity and QM are foremost in the mind
Lets start elsewhere. Watch this and then we can talk paradigms:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahg6qc...Now, I dont normally do that nor do I like to talk about optical illusions. I generally think illusions mean quite other things to what most people like to say they mean. I find that people tend to say the most boringly predictable things about optical illusions. That is a large part of the source of my aversion to them, like Pavlovs dogs, I have been taught to cringe at the first sight of
Isn't it ironic that a book about paradigm shifts caused a paradigm shift in itself? And isn't it even more ironic that I'm studying this book from a humanities perspective, a science Kuhn himself might not even call a science?The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is a fascinating book because it works out, detail after tiny detail, how a scientific revolution takes place. One of the most interesting ideas Kuhn posits is that we can't compare two paradigms with each other (say, Newtonian
a response to some of the reviews here:From those giving the book a negative rating, we inevitably get the standard accusation of relativism, which is bullshit and Kuhn and his followers have responded appropriately. A positive three-star review says Kuhn's major thesis is that scientific progress is largely illusory, when Kuhn says nothing of the sort and has also defended himself against such objections in the past by explaining, very simply, what a careful reader would have already gleaned
0 Comments