Written by Thomas Crunelle
Illustrated by Maggie Huang
In 1905, the Annus Mirabilis saw Albert Einstein publish a groundbreaking work that would be one of the most significant contributions to physics. His paper departed from the long-standing Newtonian framework, initiating a scientific revolution, which transformed the way we perceive the world today.
But what exactly is a scientific revolution?
Before all, we must present the concept of “paradigm,” introduced by the philosopher Thomas Kuhn in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 1962.1 According to Kuhn, a paradigm represents an entire way of conducting science, it is a package of statements and beliefs about the world, techniques for collecting and analyzing data, and established patterns of scientific thinking and practice.1 In short, a paradigm is like a scientific theory paired with guidelines on how to apply it and the way scientists should think about it.
Equipped with this idea, Kuhn aimed to describe how science really is. Initially, each scientific discipline begins in a state of “pre-paradigmatic science” which occurs prior to establishing a suitable paradigm while efforts are made to discover one.1
At some point, a groundbreaking piece of work emerges. This accomplishment offers valuable insight into how some parts of the world work, and it serves as a model for further research.1 Now, we have the beginning of a new paradigm! An example is Newton’s Principia Mathematica, published in 1687, which provided the foundation of physics over the following two centuries.2
Once a paradigm is found, we enter the phase of “normal science.” Inspired by a remarkable achievement, normal science refers to the scientific work carried out within the paradigm.1 During this phase, scientists engage in “puzzle-solving”, meaning that that scientists use the tools and concepts offered by the paradigm to explain, model, or discover new phenomena. 1 Here, a puzzle is taken to be something we have not yet solved but think has a solution.1 Therefore, the scientists operating under Newton’s paradigm focused on consolidating principles, making useful predictions, and solving puzzles, all based on the laws Newton had established.
However, there are times when a puzzle defies a solution. We call that an “anomaly”. For instance, Newtonian principles faced challenges and inconsistencies in explaining black-body radiation, specific heat, and the photoelectric effect.3 At first, there’s no need to worry since normal science tends to overlook anomalies, for they are not deemed threatening to the existing paradigm.1 Yet, as anomalies accumulate, scientists gradually begin to lose confidence in their paradigm, leading to a crisis.1
For Kuhn, crisis science is a unique period when the current paradigm no longer effectively inspires or guides scientists, and no new paradigm has arisen to get the field back on track.1 In a crisis, the ongoing paradigm isn’t immediately discarded, but instead, it remains until a better paradigm emerges that can address the anomalies.1 Even though scientists were aware of the issues with Newton’s paradigm before Einstein, they did not throw away the entire theory because it still worked well in practice.
Then, a new paradigm emerges, sparking a scientific revolution. The brand new work seems to solve one or more of the issues that led to the crisis in the old paradigm.1 We can think of the shift to a new paradigm as a “conversion” experience. These scientific revolutions shake up the most fundamental concepts that scientists have relied on, causing a period of extreme disorder. The usual way of carefully and systematically evaluating new ideas breaks down, and the normal process of science becomes chaotic.1 Einstein played a key role in the scientific revolution of the early 20th century by introducing his Theory of General Relativity, which addressed the issues of Newtonian physics and marked the commencement of a paradigm shift to a refined and better understanding of the world. After the revolution phase, Kuhn’s cycle starts again, commencing with a period of normal science, but now, in a new paradigm.
Sources:
- Godfrey-Smith, P. Theory and reality: An introduction to the philosophy of science. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press; 2003. p.75-90.
- Okasha, S. Philosophy of science: A very short introduction. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press; 2003. p.7.
- Kuhn, TS. The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed, enlarged. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press; 1970. p.67.