Paradigm shift (or revolutionary science) is the term first used by Thomas Kuhn in his influential book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) to describe a change in basic assumptions within the ruling theory of science. It is in contrast to his idea of normal science.

The term paradigm shift, as a change in a fundamental model of events, has since become widely applied to many other realms of human experience as well, even though Kuhn himself restricted the use of the term to the hard sciences. According to Kuhn, "A paradigm is what members of a scientific community, and they alone, share." (The Essential Tension, 1977). Unlike a normal scientist, Kuhn held, "a student in the humanities has constantly before him a number of competing and incommensurable solutions to these problems, solutions that he must ultimately examine for himself." (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions). Once a paradigm shift is complete, a scientist cannot, for example, posit the possibility that miasma causes disease or that ether carries light. In contrast, a critic in the Humanities can choose to adopt a 19th-century theory of poetics, for instance.

Since the 1960s, the term has been found useful to thinkers in numerous non-scientific contexts. Compare as a structured form of Zeitgeist.

[edit] Kuhnian paradigm shifts

Kuhn used the duck-rabbit optical illusion to demonstrate the way in which a paradigm shift could cause one to see the same information in an entirely different way.

An epistemological paradigm shift was called a scientific revolution by epistemologist and historian of science Thomas Kuhn in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

A scientific revolution occurs, according to Kuhn, when scientists encounter anomalies which cannot be explained by the universally accepted paradigm within which scientific progress has thereto been made. The paradigm, in Kuhn's view, is not simply the current theory, but the entire worldview in which it exists, and all of the implications which come with it. It is based on features of landscape of knowledge that scientists can identify around them. There are anomalies for all paradigms, Kuhn maintained, that are brushed away as acceptable levels of error, or simply ignored and not dealt with (a principal argument Kuhn uses to reject Karl Popper's model of falsifiability as the key force involved in scientific change). Rather, according to Kuhn, anomalies have various levels of significance to the practitioners of science at the time. To put it in the context of early 20th century physics, some scientists found the problems with calculating Mercury's perihelion more troubling than the Michelson-Morley experiment results, and some the other way around. Kuhn's model of scientific change differs here, and in many places, from that of the logical positivists in that it puts an enhanced emphasis on the individual humans involved as scientists, rather than abstracting science into a purely logical or philosophical venture.

When enough significant anomalies have accrued against a current paradigm, the scientific discipline is thrown into a state of crisis, according to Kuhn. During this crisis, new ideas, perhaps ones previously discarded, are tried. Eventually a new paradigm is formed, which gains its own new followers, and an intellectual "battle" takes place between the followers of the new paradigm and the hold-outs of the old paradigm. Again, for early 20th century physics, the transition between the Maxwellian electromagnetic worldview and the Einsteinian Relativistic worldview was neither instantaneous nor calm, and instead involved a protracted set of "attacks," both with empirical data as well as rhetorical or philosophical arguments, by both sides, with the Einsteinian theory winning out in the long-run. Again, the weighing of evidence and importance of new data was fit through the human sieve: some scientists found the simplicity of Einstein's equations to be most compelling, while some found them more complicated than the notion of Maxwell's aether which they banished. Some found Eddington's photographs of light bending around the sun to be compelling, some questioned their accuracy and meaning. Sometimes the convincing force is just time itself and the human toll it takes, Kuhn said, using a quote from Max Planck: "a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

After a given discipline has changed from one paradigm to another, this is called, in Kuhn's terminology, a scientific revolution or a paradigm shift. It is often this final conclusion, the result of the long process, that is meant when the term paradigm shift is used colloquially: simply the (often radical) change of worldview, without reference to the specificities of Kuhn's historical argument.

[edit] Science and paradigm shift

A common misinterpretation of paradigms is the belief that the discovery of paradigm shifts and the dynamic nature of science (with its many opportunities for subjective judgments by scientists) is a case for relativism:^[1] the view that all kinds of belief systems are equal, such that magic, religious concepts or pseudoscience would be of equal working value to true science.^{[citation needed]} Kuhn vehemently denies this interpretation and states that when a scientific paradigm is replaced by a new one, albeit through a complex social process, the new one is always better, not just different.

These claims of relativism are, however, tied to another claim that Kuhn does at least somewhat endorse: that the language and theories of different paradigms cannot be translated into one another or rationally evaluated against one another — that they are incommensurable. This gave rise to much talk of different peoples and cultures having radically different worldviews or conceptual schemes — so different that whether or not one was better, they could not be understood by one another. However, the philosopher Donald Davidson published a highly regarded essay in 1974, "On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme," arguing that the notion that any languages or theories could be incommensurable with one another was itself incoherent. If this is correct, Kuhn's claims must be taken in a weaker sense than they often are. Furthermore, the hold of the Kuhnian analysis on social science has long been tenuous with the wide application of multi-paradigmatic approaches in order to understand complex human behaviour (see for example John Hassard, Sociology and Organisation Theory. Positivism, Paradigm and Postmodernity. Cambridge University Press. 1993.)

Paradigm shifts tend to be most dramatic in sciences that appear to be stable and mature, as in physics at the end of the 19th century. At that time, physics seemed to be a discipline filling in the last few details of a largely worked-out system. In 1900, Lord Kelvin famously stated, "There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement." Five years later, Albert Einstein published his paper on special relativity, which challenged the very simple set of rules laid down by Newtonian mechanics, which had been used to describe force and motion for over three hundred years.

In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn wrote, "Successive transition from one paradigm to another via revolution is the usual developmental pattern of mature science." (p. 12) Kuhn's idea was itself revolutionary in its time, as it caused a major change in the way that academics talk about science. Thus, it could be argued that it caused or was itself part of a "paradigm shift" in the history and sociology of science. However, Kuhn would not recognise such a paradigm shift. Being in the social sciences, people can still use earlier ideas to discuss the history of science.

Philosophers and historians of science, including Kuhn himself, ultimately accepted a modified version of Kuhn's model, which synthesizes his original view with the gradualist model that preceded it. Kuhn's original model is now generally seen as too limited.

[edit] Examples of paradigm shifts in the natural sciences

Some of the "classical cases" of Kuhnian paradigm shifts in science are:

• The transition from a Ptolemaic cosmology to a Copernican one.
• The acceptance of the theory of biogenesis, that all life comes from life, as opposed to the theory of spontaneous generation, which began in the 17th century and was not complete until the 19th century with Pasteur.
• The transition between the Maxwellian Electromagnetic worldview and the Einsteinian Relativistic worldview.
• The transition between the worldview of Newtonian physics and the Einsteinian Relativistic worldview.
• The development of Quantum mechanics, which redefined Classical mechanics.
• The acceptance of Plate tectonics as the explanation for large-scale geologic changes.
• The development of absolute dating
• The acceptance of Lavoisier's theory of chemical reactions and combustion in place of phlogiston theory, known as the Chemical Revolution.
• The acceptance of Lamarck's theory of evolution to replace creationism
• The acceptance of Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection replaced Lamarckism as the mechanism for evolution.
• The acceptance of Mendelian inheritance, as opposed to pangenesis in the early 20th century

[edit] Examples of paradigm shifts in the social sciences

• The movement, known as the Cognitive revolution, away from Behaviourist approaches to psychological study and the acceptance of cognition as central to studying human behaviour.
• The Keynesian Revolution is typically viewed as a major shift in macroeconomics.^[2] According to John Kenneth Galbraith, Say's Law dominated economic thought prior to Keynes for over a century, and the shift to Keynesianism was difficult. Economists who contradicted the law, which inferred that underemployment and underinvestment (coupled with oversaving) were virtually impossible, risked losing their careers.^[3] In his magnum opus, Keynes cited one of his predecessors, J. A. Hobson,^[4] who was repeatedly denied positions at universities for his heretical theory.
• Later, the movement for monetarism over Keynesianism marked a second divisive shift. Monetarists held that fiscal policy was unimportant for economic stabilization, in contrast to the Keynesian view that both fiscal and monetary policy were important.^[5]
• Fritjof Capra describes a paradigm shift presently happening in science from physics to the life sciences. This shift in perceptive accompanies a shift in values and is characterized by ecological literacy.^[6]

[edit] As marketing speak

In the later part of the 1990s, 'paradigm shift' emerged as a buzzword, popularized as marketing speak and appearing more frequently in print and publication.^[7] In his book, Mind The Gaffe, author Larry Trask advises readers to refrain from using it, and to use caution when reading anything that contains the phrase. It is referred to in several articles and books^[8][9] as abused and overused to the point of becoming meaningless.

[edit] On The Radio

In 2009, Paradigm Shifts Radio launched on WMBR, the MIT campus radio station, broadcasting on 88.1 FM. The hour-long show is hosted by MIT and Stanford Business School Alum, Rohit Sakhuja. Paradigm Shifts discusses ideas about changing the way people work, live and play in the 21st Century. Guests include leaders in society with a goal to understand their stories, and how they see the world unfolding.^[10]

• Episode 1: October 8, 2009 - Design Thinking with Tim Brown, CEO of Ideo; Prizes for Innovation with Erika Wagner, Executive Director of X-Prize Lab at M.I.T.
• Episode 2: October 22, 2009 - A New World Order with Partha Ghosh, Managing Director of Partha Ghosh & Associates; Brain Fitness with Alvaro Fernandez, CEO of Sharp Brains Corporation.
• Episode 3: November 5, 2009 - The Networked Automobile with Robin Chase, founding CEO of Zipcar; User Innovation with Eric Von Hippel, Professor of Management at the MIT Sloan School of Management.

[edit] Other uses

This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2009)

The term "paradigm shift" has found uses in other contexts, representing the notion of a major change in a certain thought-pattern — a radical change in personal beliefs, complex systems or organizations, replacing the former way of thinking or organizing with a radically different way of thinking or organizing:

• Handa, M. L., a professor of sociology in education at O.I.S.E. University of Toronto, Canada, developed the concept of a paradigm within the context of social sciences. He defines what he means by "paradigm" and introduces the idea of a "social paradigm". In addition, he identifies the basic component of any social paradigm. Like Kuhn, he addresses the issue of changing paradigms, the process popularly known as "paradigm shift." In this respect, he focuses on the social circumstances which precipitate such a shift. Relatedly, he addresses how that shift affects social institutions, including the institution of education.
• The concept has been developed in economics (Giovanni Dosi) in the identification of new techno-economic paradigms as changes in technological systems that have a major influence on the behaviour of the entire economy. This concept is linked to Schumpeter's idea of "creative gales of destruction". Examples include the move to mass production, and the introduction of microelectronics.
• The mainstream availability in the U.S. of the female birth control pills in the 1960s, combined with effective new treatments for venereal diseases, led to the Sexual Revolution that accompanied many other shifts in attitudes and ideas during that period.
• A widely distributed picture of the Earth entitled "Earthrise" taken from the moon by astronauts is thought by some to have deeply affected the consciousness of humanity in helping to usher in the environmentalist movement which gained great prominence in the years immediately following distribution of that image.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

[edit] External links

• MIT 6.933J - The Structure of Engineering Revolutions. From MIT OpenCourseWare, course materials (graduate level) for a course on the history of technology through a Kuhnian lens.
• What did the codger buy? Paradigm Shift, by Paul Niquette Copyright ©1997 Sophisticated: The Magazine From Puzzles with a Purpose, A Kuhnian illustration of a worrisome implication for technology.
• Liu, G. Z. & Hwang, G. J. (2009). A key step to understanding paradigm shifts in e-learning: towards context-aware ubiquitous learning. British Journal of Educational Technology.