Editing Philosophy of science (section)

===Thomas Kuhn===
{{Main|The Structure of Scientific Revolutions}}

In the 1962 book ''[[The Structure of Scientific Revolutions]]'', [[Thomas Kuhn]] argued that the process of observation and evaluation takes place within a "paradigm", which he describes as "universally recognized achievements that for a time provide model problems and solutions to community of practitioners."<ref>{{cite book|
last=Kuhn|first=Thomas|title=[[The Structure of Scientific Revolutions]]|year=1972|edition = 2nd| publisher=The University of Chicago|isbn=0-226-45803-2}}, p. viii</ref> A paradigm implicitly identifies the objects and relations under study and suggests what experiments, observations or theoretical improvements need to be carried out to produce a useful result.<ref>Kuhn clarified that these are two related senses of "paradigm": (1) "the entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques" and (2) "the set of puzzle-examples which, employed as models or examples, can replace explicit rules as a basis" and are used to illustrate the field for beginners. {{harvnb|Kuhn|1972|p=175}}</ref> He characterized [[normal science]] as the process of observation and "puzzle solving" which takes place within a paradigm, whereas [[revolutionary science]] occurs when one paradigm overtakes another in a [[paradigm shift]].<ref>{{cite journal
|url = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/thomas-kuhn/
|title = Thomas Kuhn
|access-date = 2015-10-26
|last = Bird
|first = Alexander
|year = 2013
|website = Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
|editor1-last = Zalta
|editor1-first = Edward N.
|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20170713100633/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/thomas-kuhn/
|archive-date = 2017-07-13
|url-status = live
}}</ref>

Kurn was a historian of science, and his ideas were inspired by the study of older paradigms that have been discarded, such as [[Aristotelian mechanics]] or [[aether theory]]. These had often been portrayed by historians as using "unscientific" methods or beliefs. But careful examination showed that they were no less "scientific" than modern paradigms. Both were based on valid evidence, both failed to answer every possible question.{{sfn|Kuhn|1972|p=1-7}} 

A paradigm shift occurred when a significant number of observational anomalies arose in the old paradigm and efforts to resolve them within the paradigm were unsuccessful. A new paradigm was available that handled the anomalies with less difficulty and yet still covered (most of) the previous results. Over a period of time, often as long as a generation, more practitioners began working within the new paradigm and eventually the old paradigm was abandoned.{{sfn|Kuhn|1972}} For Kuhn, acceptance or rejection of a paradigm is a social process as much as a logical process. 

Kuhn's position, however, is not one of [[relativism]]; he wrote "terms like 'subjective' and 'intuitive' cannot be applied to [paradigms]."{{sfn|Kuhn|1972|p=175}} Paradigms are grounded in objective, observable evidence, but our use of them is psychological and our acceptance of them is social.