Re: Kuhn pretty much defines a mature science as having only a single paradigm, where many of the advances in science required and thrived off pluralism I’ve found in my reading of Kuhn that he isn’t positing that only one paradigm of science can exist (beyond a consensus decision to find objective evidence etc) Rather he’s proposing a theory of change WITHIN any given paradigm ie: Once a dominant paradigm has been established.
He explicitly mentions a pre-paradigmatic period, which is where I would place Alignment today, where multiple paradigms compete .. Also (According to Gemini ) he mentions that sub-paradigms can co-exist within a dominant paradigm as long as they don’t oppose the original ruleset. Src: postscript to the second edition*
Re: Kuhn pretty much defines a mature science as having only a single paradigm, where many of the advances in science required and thrived off pluralism
I’ve found in my reading of Kuhn that he isn’t positing that only one paradigm of science can exist (beyond a consensus decision to find objective evidence etc) Rather he’s proposing a theory of change WITHIN any given paradigm ie: Once a dominant paradigm has been established.
He explicitly mentions a pre-paradigmatic period, which is where I would place Alignment today, where multiple paradigms compete .. Also (According to Gemini ) he mentions that sub-paradigms can co-exist within a dominant paradigm as long as they don’t oppose the original ruleset. Src: postscript to the second edition*