Thomas Kuhn and Textbooks
Since the beginning of academic studies, inquiries into history and science have often and generally been regarded as two completely opposite entities. In addition to different research methods, dissimilar types of "scholars" approached these diverse endeavors. In his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn discusses the juxtaposition of this dichotomy—namely the history of science.
Central to the book's theme is the concept of textbooks. Kuhn argues that textbooks act merely as an advertisement into scientific disciplines, proclaiming instead that one should focus upon "the historical record of the research activity itself" (1). Although Kuhn elaborates on the distinction between the "incremental process" of the history of science and the "chronological" history of science, he fails to apply this distinction; rather, he refuses to recognize the bona fide purpose of textbooks as being simply an explanation of what science knows to be true at this point in time and instead believes more could be learned if textbooks were to "describe and explain the congeries of error, myth, and superstition" (2) of scientific predecessors.
Consider the metaphor of a textbook being an oak tree. As scientific knowledge is accrued, the tree grows accordingly. According to Kuhn, when an "error" is exposed or a "myth" is annulled, the tree would die and an acorn would fall. This acorn would then germinate, producing an offspring that would grow rapidly to be slightly larger than the former; this development would proceed as scientific advancements are made and then nullified. More importantly, Kuhn would agree that the entire tree should be the textbook: from the roots to the trunk to the branches and foliage at the top (representing the entire history of science).
Contrary to Kuhn's view would imply the tree never dies and a new tree never stems from it. Instead, there would be only one tree that would grow continuously. Furthermore, only the foliage atop the tree would be the textbook (representing what is currently known about science).
While the growth of the tree is based on the same premise of the incremental accrual of knowledge as Kuhn's tree, the difference lies in the fact that Kuhn's tree must die and then re-grow to become larger whereas the contrary tree is continuously growing.
A good view the Truax had was that for every tree cut down, 5 more are planted. It is a fact that newer trees give off more air than older trees, so cutting down the older trees
Thomas Kuhn, an American Philosopher of Science in the twentieth century, introduced the controversial idea of "paradigm shifts" in his 1962 book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions." This essay will discuss paradigm shifts, scientific revolutions, mop up work, and other key topics that Kuhn writes about in "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" in great detail. This essay will explain what Kuhn means by mop up work, by drawing on the broader view of paradigms that he presents and explaining how paradigms are born and develop such that they structure the activities of normal science in specific ways, and this essay will show how this kind of mop up work can, in certain circumstances, lead to a new paradigm instead of more normal science.
trees get the stronger they usually get. When one looks at the cracks and features of the tree, one can notice
Popper asserts that "it is easy to obtain confirmations, or verifications, for nearly every theory--if we look for confirmations." Kuhn illustrates (page 6), in his discussion of cosmologies, that man needs a structure for his universe. Man needs to explain the physical relation between his personal habitat and nature in order to feel at home. Explaining this relation gives meaning to his actions.
explicitly state the type of tree that was forbidden, just as the Book of Genesis only tells of an
In Christianity, trees were viewed as a primary source of life and knowledge, exhibited in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:9). Denver used trees as a safe haven for her; a safe place where she can hide from her mother after the trauma that transpired the night that crawling already? was killed. “Veiled and protected by the live green walls, she felt ripe and clear, and salvation was as easy as a wish,”(Morrison, 29). Contrasting with the safety of the trees for Denver, Sethe’s idea of trees has much darker connotations. As a child, she saw “Boys hangin’ from the most beautiful sycamores in the world. It shamed her-remembering the wonderful soughing trees rather than the boys,” (Morrison 6). For Sethe, the symbolism of trees has been twisted into viewing trees not as hope, but as death, and the pain from her past. As Amy had observed, the scars on Sethe only served as reminders of her painful time at Sweet Home, where she had very little hope for the future. A lesson that should be derived from this book is that the perspective from which you look at the past could help it become less painful. Sethe is too focused on the pain of her past, so therefore she is unable to see trees as they were meant to be seen, while Paul D views them as a pathway to second chances. He views trees as “inviting; things you could trust and be ear; talk to if you wanted to as he frequently did since way back when he took the midday meal in the fields of Sweet Home,” (Morrison,
Without theories, scientists’ experiments would yield no significance to the world. Theories are the core of the scientific community; therefore figuring out how to determine which theory prevails amongst the rest is an imperative matter. Kuhn was one of the many bold scientists to attempt to bring forth an explanation for why one theory is accepted over another, as well as the process of how this occurs, known as the Scientific Revolution. Kuhn chooses to refer to a theory as a ‘paradigm’, which encompasses a wide range of definitions such as “a way of doing science in a specific field”, “claims about the world”, “methods of fathering/analyzing data”, “habits of scientific thought and action”, and “a way of seeing the world and interacting with it” (Smith, pg.76). However in this case, we’ll narrow paradigm to have a similar definition to that of a ‘theory’, which is a system of ideas used to explain something; it can also be deemed a model for the scientific community to follow. Kuhn’s explanation of a Scientific Revolution brings to light one major problem—the problem of incommensurability.
...ce, if this were scientific knowledge that apparently is not true, it would still be considered an item of order, a false one. However, if the false scientific data is currently acceptable, then our mindset and way of thinking remains unchanged, but, in the final analysis, science or technology cannot develop in the long term with false scientific information. The false scientific truth would have temporary impact on our lives, since we would notice there is a disorder with this false information and someone would challenge it and replace it with more accurate information. In fact, when we discover that this knowledge is in reality, false, we would fix it and progress further in the fields of science and technology, and our lives would therefore be greatly influenced in the short and long term.
This is first introduced when the Maitu Seed (Mother Seed or “Our Truth”) is shown and while Asha is dreaming about a tree growing in the desert (Pumzi 0:44). This scene however, granted the Maitu Seed an important role in the movie. This theme was introduced again when Asha got to her lab and the branch of the last living tree was on display with the title “There Goes the Last Tree” (Pumzi 4:05). This was a dead giveaway that deforestation plays a major role in the development of the story. It demonstrated the importance of trees as well.
Symbolism plays a key role in the novella in allowing the author to relay his political ideals. In The King of Trees, Cheng uses many elements of nature to represent both revolutionary and counter-revolutionary ideas. The king of trees - and trees in general - throughout the novella is a symbol of counter-revolutionary ideals, and the older Chinese customs. Li Li, and in turn, the followers of Mao Zedong/the Red Guard, believe that “In practical terms, old things must be destroyed” (Cheng 43). This is shown through the felling of the trees – getting rid of the Old Chinese cus...
However, by making the assumption that all statements are universally either “true” or “false”, he dismisses perfectly logical scientific explanations which are merely outdated. Specifically, he is saying that explanations that were previously accepted by the scientific community but are no longer due to “ampler evidence now available...was not-and had never been-a correct explanation” (138). This is simply not true, as the “correctness” of an explanation is not binary; that is, there may exist some explanations which provide partial explanations which may be perfectly accurate in some contexts, but misleading or even wrong in others. I will refer to this as the context dependency of scientific laws. A good example of such a phenomenon with more than one correct explanation is how electricity is produced. Electricity can be explained as the motion of electrons, which are subatomic particles that circulate around the nucleus of an atom. The Bohr model gives this explanation, claiming that an atom looks akin to our solar system. Recently, more accurate models like the Schroedinger model have come through to state that the Bohr model is not entirely accurate, and that the existence of electrons around atoms in certain places is based on probabilistic models. Despite this new information, the Bohr model can still be used to explain electricity and the motion of
Moreover, the nature of human beings in “The Nature and Necessity of Scientific Revolution” is to change. Kuhn’s work mentions that as the universe is evolving, human beings seek
Knowledge is something that can change day to day, which can be learned through both the natural and human sciences. Knowledge changes in the natural sciences when an experiment is conducted and more data has been gathered. Knowledge changes in human sciences when patterns are recognized in society and further tests have been conducted. Does our knowledge of things in the natural and human sciences change every day? I think that our knowledge grows everyday but does not necessarily change every day. The areas of knowledge that will be discussed in this essay are natural and human sciences. In History we can see that at one point something that was considered knowledge then transformed into different knowledge, especially in the natural sciences. However, in the past, due to lack of technology, it might have been more of a lack of knowledge that then turned into knowledge on the topic.
By incorporating NOS in science textbooks, not only we will be addressing the problem suggested by Sutton (1998), but, also, as teachers, we will be reinforcing scientific expertise needed in to develop active citizens while attaining two roles in scientific understandings that are “knowing how” science was established and “knowing that” which is constituted of facts and scientific knowledge (Bellous &Siegel, 1991). Finally, Sutton’s chapter provides a concise framework for teachers and research scholars to view science teaching and scientific knowledge from a different perspective. Such that the science content and teaching should be viewed from the scientists’ perspective to the extent that collaboration between scientific community is needed to reach such
This essay will discuss differences in motives which have driven ancient and modern science, arguing that 17th century alterations of power structures led to the ultimate division between modern and ancient science and the eruption of modern science as it is today. Comparisons will be drawn regarding knowledge accessibility, prevailing philosophies and ideologies, and the relationship between science and the church.