Kuhn Disciplinary Matrix

1072 Words3 Pages

3.3 Disciplinary Matrix As we have seen in the previous chapter, many critics accused Kuhn of using the term paradigm in an ambiguous way in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and in papers composed around the same time. Kuhn admitted that he was unconscious about the expansion of the paradigm concept that took place in his early works. This motivated him to clarify the concept. He began by asking the following question: after identifying a community of practitioners of a scientific specialty, "[w]hat shared elements account for the relatively unproblematic character of [their] professional communication and for the relative unanimity of [their] professional judgment?" Kuhn gave two answers corresponding to the two senses …show more content…

He insisted that these propositions, when considered as an element of disciplinary matrix, must be seen as uninterpreted symbols divorced from all empirical meanings. Thus symbolic generalizations in this sense permit scientists to use logic and mathematics to analyze their puzzles during their practice of normal science. The reason why Kuhn did abstract symbolic generalizations from their empirical meanings is that the consensus of a scientific community over the laws of nature and basic equations has two distinct aspects. The first aspect involves the general agreement among members of a scientific community over the logical form of laws and equations, i.e. over symbolic generalizations. The second aspect involves the empirical interpretation of these pure logical forms. Kuhn claimed that different members of a community may agree on symbolic generalizations but disagree on the empirical meanings that must be attached to them. Therefore, Kuhn was at the right track when he distinguished between these two aspects of consensus over laws and equations. As we shall see soon, the second aspect constitutes the fourth element of the disciplinary matrix, the exemplary problem …show more content…

Kuhn asserted that many features of scientific progress can be understood by considering the values that the members of scientific communities hold. Unlike the other elements of the matrix, values do not substantially vary over time, and the same value system may be shared by different scientific communities. This may explain the fact that all natural scientists form a large single community, they are socially united by their possession of a common value system. According to Kuhn, scientists usually employ this common value system to evaluate theories. This process of evaluation is of two levels. The first level is the evaluation of the way in which individual scientists apply their theories. This process occurs at all time during the practice of normal science. The second level is the evaluation of the theory as a whole. This process occurs at the occasional times of crises during which two rival theories are

Open Document