Thomas Kuhn (the “Revolutionary” Philosopher) Was Right About Science… Sometimes
Paul Austin Murphy medium.com
Does a happy medium (if, perhaps, a rather artificial one) need to be found between those who believe that Thomas Kuhn was “evil” (see here), and those who see science as being merely in the game of…
https://miro.medium.com/v2/5d8de952517e8160e40ef9841c781cdc14a5db313057fa3c3de41c6f5b494b19
Medium
Does a happy medium (if, perhaps, a rather artificial one) need to be found between those who believe that Thomas Kuhn was “evil” (see here), and those who see science as being merely in the game of “social construction”? Perhaps that happy medium is to read Kuhn as simply describing science in a more honest (warts and all) manner, rather than in an idealised (or normative) way (as, arguably, Karl Popper did).

(i) Is Thomas Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science “Entirely Political”?

(ii) The Critics of Thomas Kuhn

(iii) John Horgan on Thomas Kuhn: “Absolute Truths” vs “Equal Untruths”

[This essay relies a fair amount on the science journalist John Horgan’s account of his interview with Thomas Kuhn. Horgan’s words can be found in his Scientific American article ‘What Thomas Kuhn Really Thought about Scientific Truth’, as well as in his book The End of Science. The following essay doesn’t tackle Kuhn’s notion of a paradigm.]

Is Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science “Entirely Political”?