Unique Essay Sample On The Meaning Of The Kuhnian Model

Kuhnian Model

History of science has in the past been seen in the lens of developing by accumulation. However, Thomas Kuhn came up with a new method of looking at the history of science. Kuhn made a publication in University of Chicago about the history of science. In his publication, he sought to revise the old fashioned analysis of science and came up with a model that showed a disruption of the conceptualized continuity of scientific revolution. Kuhn approaches this model with concepts as opposed to rules and laws. The model deals with scientific epochs on a case-by- case basis. The synopsis of these models is that the theory of evolution of science does not come from an event of accumulation of facts. The models posit that changing circumstances of knowledge and possibilities resulted in evolution of science.

His arguments agree with non-linear history theory. The model gives three distinct phases of development of science theories. The first phase is said to occur only once. This is referred to as the pre-paradigm phase. During this phase, there exists no agreement over any theory. Research is however carried out. The research is scientific in nature. Incompatible and incomplete theories characterize this phase. This phase gives room to the second stage, known as the normal science.

The normal science stage occurs after there has been consensus on methods, experiment and the terminology to use on that particular scientific area. Normal science lives on in as long as consensus exists. The normal science only suffers change after it fails to resolve some existing issues. Here, a crisis develops. The existing paradigm fails to solve the emerging issues and the weakness of normal science becomes exposed. Even though crises may occur during this stage, they often are solved within its own paradigm. An accumulation of the difficulties and controversies generated by the paradigm in the second stage may lead to a third and last stage of science theory evolution.

The revolutionary stage is the last one according to Kuhn model description. In this stage, there is re-examination of underlying assumptions that existed in the previous paradigm. This leads to development of an entirely new paradigm. When the paradigm has been formed, normal science is revisited. The settling on normal science is accompanied by use of the newly established paradigm.         

The three clearly explain Kuhn’s thoughts about how science has undergone interruptions that have created new paradigms. Contrary to the old held belief, Kuhn’s model does not agree with the ever accumulation status of facts in scientific knowledge. The three phases are different from one another. They have helped to shape science. This essay has managed to bring out the model in a clear manner.