Kuhn%20Profile - Profile: Reluctant Revolutionary Thomas...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Profile: Reluctant Revolutionary Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996) unleashed “paradigm” on the world by John Horgan, Scientific American , May, 1991, pp. 40-41 “Look,” says Thomas Kuhn. The word seems to signal that Kuhn thinks his listener has misunderstood him, or is in danger of doing so, and he, Kuhn, is going to try--probably in vain--to set the terribly complicated record straight. Kuhn utters the word often. Look,” he says again. He leans his gangly frame and long face forward, and his big lip, which ordinarily curls up amicably at the corners, sags. “For Christ’s sakes if I had my choice of having written the book or not having written it, I would choose to have written it. But there have certainly been aspects involving considerable upset about the response to it. “The book” is The Structure of Scientific Revolutions , commonly called the most influential treatise on how science does (or does not) proceed. Since its publication in 1962, it has sold nearly a million copies in 16 languages, and is still fundamental reading in courses on the history and philosophy of science. The book is notable for having spawned that trendy term “paradigm,.” It also fomented the now trite idea that personalities and politics play a large role in science. Perhaps the books’ most profound argument is less obvious: Scientists can never understand the “real world” or even--to a crucial degree—one another. Given this theme, one might think that Kuhn, a 68-year-old professor of philosophy and history of science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, would have expected his own ideas to be misunderstood. But he still seems pained by the breadth of misunderstanding, by persistent claims, for example, that he thinks scientists are “irrational.” “If they said ‘arrational,’ I wouldn’t have minded at all,“ he remarks with no trace of a smile. Kuhn’s fear of compounding the confusion over his work has made him a bit press-shy. Although he finally agrees to talk to Scientific American about his career (after unburdening himself of the fact that in 1964 this magazine gav e Structure “the worst review I can remember”), he must point out the pitfalls of the exercise. “One is not one’s own historian,” he warns, “let alone one’s own psychoanalyst.” Kuhn nonetheless traces his view of science to a single “Eureka” moment in 1947. He was working toward his doctorate in physics at Harvard University when he was asked to teach some science to undergraduate humanities majors. Searching for a simple case history that could illuminate the roots of Newtonian physics, Kuhn opened Aristotle’s Physics and was astonished at how wrong it was. How could someone so brilliant on other topics be so misguided in physics? Kuhn was pondering this mystery, staring out of the window of his dormitory room (“I can still see the vines and the shade two thirds of the way down”) when suddenly Aristotle “made sense.” Kuhn realized that Aristotle’s views of such basic concepts as motion and matter were totally unlike Newton’s. Aristotle
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 2

Kuhn%20Profile - Profile: Reluctant Revolutionary Thomas...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online