Normal science: not uncritical or dogmatic

Samuel Schindler

doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04527-w

Normal science: not uncritical or dogmatic

^*Corresponding author for this work

Department of Mathematics - Science Studies

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaper › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Abstract

When Kuhn first published his Structure of Scientific Revolutions he was accused of promoting an “irrationalist” account of science. Although it has since been argued that this charge is unfair in one aspect or another, the early criticism still exerts an influence on our understanding of Kuhn. In particular, normal science is often characterized as dogmatic and uncritical, even by commentators sympathetic to Kuhn. I argue not only that there is no textual evidence for this view but also that normal science is much better understood as being based on epistemically justified commitment to a paradigm and as pragmatic in its handling of anomalies. I also argue that normal science is an example of what I call Kuhn’s program of revisionary rational reconstruction.

Original language	English
Article number	108
Journal	Synthese
Volume	203
Issue	4
ISSN	0039-7857
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-024-04527-w
Publication status	Published - Apr 2024

Keywords

Dogmatism
Kuhn
Normal science
Rational reconstruction
Rationality

Access to Document

10.1007/s11229-024-04527-wLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{f2f87cd850564887990786ba083da0bd,

title = "Normal science: not uncritical or dogmatic",

abstract = "When Kuhn first published his Structure of Scientific Revolutions he was accused of promoting an “irrationalist” account of science. Although it has since been argued that this charge is unfair in one aspect or another, the early criticism still exerts an influence on our understanding of Kuhn. In particular, normal science is often characterized as dogmatic and uncritical, even by commentators sympathetic to Kuhn. I argue not only that there is no textual evidence for this view but also that normal science is much better understood as being based on epistemically justified commitment to a paradigm and as pragmatic in its handling of anomalies. I also argue that normal science is an example of what I call Kuhn{\textquoteright}s program of revisionary rational reconstruction.",

keywords = "Dogmatism, Kuhn, Normal science, Rational reconstruction, Rationality",

author = "Samuel Schindler",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s) 2024.",

year = "2024",

month = apr,

doi = "10.1007/s11229-024-04527-w",

language = "English",

volume = "203",

journal = "Synthese",

issn = "0039-7857",

publisher = "Springer",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Normal science

T2 - not uncritical or dogmatic

AU - Schindler, Samuel

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2024.

PY - 2024/4

Y1 - 2024/4

N2 - When Kuhn first published his Structure of Scientific Revolutions he was accused of promoting an “irrationalist” account of science. Although it has since been argued that this charge is unfair in one aspect or another, the early criticism still exerts an influence on our understanding of Kuhn. In particular, normal science is often characterized as dogmatic and uncritical, even by commentators sympathetic to Kuhn. I argue not only that there is no textual evidence for this view but also that normal science is much better understood as being based on epistemically justified commitment to a paradigm and as pragmatic in its handling of anomalies. I also argue that normal science is an example of what I call Kuhn’s program of revisionary rational reconstruction.

AB - When Kuhn first published his Structure of Scientific Revolutions he was accused of promoting an “irrationalist” account of science. Although it has since been argued that this charge is unfair in one aspect or another, the early criticism still exerts an influence on our understanding of Kuhn. In particular, normal science is often characterized as dogmatic and uncritical, even by commentators sympathetic to Kuhn. I argue not only that there is no textual evidence for this view but also that normal science is much better understood as being based on epistemically justified commitment to a paradigm and as pragmatic in its handling of anomalies. I also argue that normal science is an example of what I call Kuhn’s program of revisionary rational reconstruction.

KW - Dogmatism

KW - Kuhn

KW - Normal science

KW - Rational reconstruction

KW - Rationality

U2 - 10.1007/s11229-024-04527-w

DO - 10.1007/s11229-024-04527-w

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85188961761

SN - 0039-7857

VL - 203

JO - Synthese

JF - Synthese

IS - 4

M1 - 108

ER -

Normal science: not uncritical or dogmatic

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this