I respond to Scerri’s recent reply to my claim that there was a scientific revolution in chemistry in the early 20th Century. I grant, as Scerri insists, that there are significant continuities through the change about which we are arguing. That is so in all scientific revolutions. But I argue that the changes were such that they constitute a Kuhnian revolution, not in the classic sense of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, but in the sense of Kuhn’s mature theory, developed in the 1980s and early 1990s.
Original language
English
Article number
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-022-09423-0
Journal
Foundations of Chemistry: Philosophical, Historical, Educational and Interdisciplinary Studies of Chemistry
Number of pages
10
ISSN
1386-4238
Publication status
E-pub ahead of print - Feb 2022
Research areas
atomic number, chemical elements, scientific revolution, Thomas Kuhn, isotopes, periodic table of elements, theory change
