[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Units of Scientiic Achievement
Yep, evolutionery theory actually runs counter to "normal" science, but what
would it take to *disprove* it? I can't imagine. Intelligent design has
something of the same problem--you would have to disprove the existence of
God in order to disprove it.
Carol
On 20 June 2011 15:43, Michael Glassman <MGlassman@ehe.osu.edu> wrote:
> I think Kuhn's idea of revolution as defining movement between paradigms
> comes not from speed but from the idea that change is not adaptive nor
> necessarily progressive, but is instead based on the failure of the dominant
> paradigm to solve crucial problems (hence problem solving at the unit of
> analysis). As a matter of fact my reading is that within Kuhn's framework
> of change the idea of evolution actually works against change. This is
> because those who are most wedded to the paradigm will continuously make the
> argument that the paradigm itself is evolving and should not be abandoned.
> They will always make the argument just one more experiment, just one more
> twist or turn to the theory and the paradigm is right back on course.
> Change though means a complete break, a giving up on the idea that a
> paradigm can actually adapt, and there is a revolution in thinking.
>
> Michael
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu on behalf of Andy Blunden
> Sent: Mon 6/20/2011 9:33 AM
> To: Carol Macdonald
> Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Units of Scientiic Achievement
>
>
> Well, the literature on that book would probably fill a library so I ought
> to limit myself.
>
> I don't know where the idea of "no revolutions" comes from, but I would
> have thought that the idea that the dominant paradigm being gradually eroded
> in the very process of working itself out is pretty suggestive. Maybe the
> fall of Apartheid didn't live up to the image of a revolution either?
> Anyway, I think there are a lot of parallels with both Vygotsky and Hegel,
> so long as one remains within the confines of a closed scientific community.
> The main thing I was struck by was Kuhn's notion of concepts as problem
> solution.
>
> Vygotsky said it many times, but for example from "The development of
> thinking and concept formation in the adolescent" in the Vygotsky Reader:
> "only during the course of some intelligent activity directed toward the
> attainment of a specific goal or the solution of a particular problem, can a
> concept come into being and take form." Or this paragraph:
>
>
>
> "In contrast to the process of maturation of instincts and inborn
> drives, the impelling force which determines the start of any process or
> initiates any evolving mechanism of behaviour and propels it forward along
> the path of further development, is not to be found inside, but outside the
> adolescent and, in this sense, the problems thrown up in front of the
> maturing adolescent by the society around him, which are connected with the
> process of growing into the cultural, professional and social life of
> adults, are extremely important functional aspects which continually depend
> on the reciprocal conditionality and the organic coherence and internal
> unity of form and content in the development of thinking."
>
> When you say "the cell concept of the concept is there all the time," I
> presume you mean the paradigm which is generating the problem-solving
> activity? Yes, until it falls into crisis. So you have an ideal, which first
> arose as a solution to a total crisis, and then sets up a new project to
> establish itself and solve its own problems. And thus all the subordinate
> concepts, its "special principles" (to use Hegel's phrase) appear in the
> form of problems needing to be solved. But the solution or not of every
> problem ricochets back on the "cell" as you call it.
>
> Does that make sense?
> Andy
>
> Carol Macdonald wrote:
>
> It's me, who never has the reference to hand, but apparently, there
> aren't actual revolutions, the dominant paradigm gets gets eroded and
> eroded over time.
>
> And yes, I can see the unit as the developed concept--but aren't we
> going to have to describe what happens as this thing is developing? So I
> don't think it is totally compelling. Of course I may be missing something,
> and the cell concept of the concept is there all the time? What do you
> think, Andy?
>
> Carol
>
>
>
>
> On 20 June 2011 12:11, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
>
>
> I have just re-read Kuhn's "Structure of Scientific
> Revolutions" after many years. As is often the case with a classic like
> this, it proved to be a lot more nuanced than its reception (or my memory of
> it).
> One of the lines which struck me was this: "the unit of
> scientific achievement is the solved problem." (p. 169)
> In the context of Vygotsky's writing on true concepts and
> the meaning he gives to "unit" this is very profound. Reading Kuhn from
> Vygotsky I find very productive.
>
> Andy
> --
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Joint Editor MCA:
> http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=g932564744
> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
> MIA: http://www.marxists.org <http://www.marxists.org/>
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Visiting Lecturer
> Wits School of Education
> Research Fellow
> Linguistics Dept: Unisa
> -----------------------------------------
> HOME (please use these details)
> 6 Andover Road
> Westdene
> Johannesburg 2092
> +27 (0)11 673 9265 +27 (0)82 562 1050
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> ________________________________
>
> *Andy Blunden*
> Joint Editor MCA:
> http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=g932564744
> Home Page: http://home.mira.net/~andy/
> Book: http://www.brill.nl/default.aspx?partid=227&pid=34857
> MIA: http://www.marxists.org <http://www.marxists.org/>
>
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
--
Visiting Lecturer
Wits School of Education
Research Fellow
Linguistics Dept: Unisa
-----------------------------------------
HOME (please use these details)
6 Andover Road
Westdene
Johannesburg 2092
+27 (0)11 673 9265 +27 (0)82 562 1050
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca