They are described in a number of essays and published lectures that were collected in Kuhncf. These passages make the same basic points that both Feyerabend and Kuhn made with their claims about incommensurability of scientific theories: Because older ideas are misunderstood, as a result of taking them out of their theoretical context, proponents of incommensurable scientific theories misunderstand each other, both claiming to have the facts on their side.
The structure of scientific revolution 2nd ed.
The vocabulary and problem-solving methods that the paradigms use can be different: the proponents of competing paradigms utilize a different conceptual network. Where Kuhn had earlier likened the process by which historians come to understand antiquated science as a special type of translation, he retracted these claims, insisting that the process is one of language learning, not translation , , Rather, they are rejected and replaced, having been falsified. Second, a revision in the logical empiricist conception of scientific advance is required. Like in evolution, the process does not change toward some fixed goal according to some fixed rules, methods or standards, but rather it changes away from the pressures exerted by anomalies on the reigning theory Kuhn , — A kind from one taxonomy is mutually exclusive with another if it cannot simply be introduced into it because the objects to which it refers would be subject to different sets of natural laws. Dordrecht: D. Feyerabend argued that this principle is inconsistent with the existence of incommensurable concepts. In the foreword of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn acknowledged a deep debt to Ludwik Fleck, a bacteriologist who developed the first explicit sociology of natural science, and anticipated many contemporary views about the social construction of knowledge.
Thomas S. He concluded that the idea of a fixed, historically invariant scientific method is a myth. Feyerabend argued that such age-old philosophical problems have not been solved because the disputants resist the kind of meaning change necessary for their dissolution.
Kuhn Papers, MC , boxes 30— Three biographies: Kuhn, Feyerabend, and incommensurability. They are described in a number of essays and published lectures that were collected in Kuhn , cf. Oxford: Blackwell. Such developments require replacing existing concepts with new concepts that are incompatible with the older ideas. Conceptual conservativism unjustly favors existing ideas over potential improvements offered by incommensurable alternatives. According to the no-overlap principle, no two kind terms may overlap in their referents unless they are related as species to genus. Feyerabend used the idea of incommensurability to attempt to expose a dogmatic element that contemporary empiricists share with school philosophies such as Platonism and Cartesianism from whom empiricists had tried to distance themselves by insisting on an empirical foundation for scientific knowledge. Savage, — Feyerabend recalled a conversation in which Bohr had talked about the discovery that the square root of two cannot be an integer or a fraction. Most kind terms must be learned as members of one or another contrast set. Possible worlds in history of science. Relativism refuted: A critique of contemporary epistemological relativism. In dealing with the second consideration Feyerabend asks "why should it be necessary to have a terminology that allows us to say that two theories refer to the same experiment.
The term commensurability was coined because of a series of problems that both authors found when trying to interpret successive scientific theories. Beyond Kuhn: Scientific explanation, theory structure, incommensurability and physical necessity.
In The road since structure.
Such kind terms are used to state laws and theories and must be learned together through experience , ; cf. The Copernican revolution: planetary astronomy in the development of western thought. Meaning and scientific change.
Once an alternative theory is presented the critical phase commences regarding T' which must answer the following questions: a why has theory T been successful up until now and b why has it failed.
based on 3 review