Changes

|Prehistory=This was not an issue during the era of logical positivists, logical empiricists and [[Karl Popper ]] due to the fact that they were mainly concerned with normative theories. As a result, their theories have concentrated on explicit requirements rather than the actual expectations of science. For example, Popper has criticized logical positivists on a priori explicit methodological grounds. It is also important to note that all of them agreed on the existence of a universal scientific method. While they disagreed on what the exact method was, they still presupposed it. Consequently, they believed that all scientific communities utilized the scientific method either explicitly or implicitly. The view over the existence of a universal scientific method is also shared by [[John Worrall ]] as well.

[[Thomas Kuhn ]] was more ambiguous on the issue. He rejected the existence of a universal method and believed that different paradigms employed different methods. However, his view can be read as change in methodology as well. After a paradigm shift occurs, scientists change their explicitly stated methodology in the new textbooks. Thus, it is not clear what his view is on this issue.

[[Larry Laudan ]] believed that there was a disconnection between what scientists believed they were doing and what they were actually doing. The former refers to the explicit statements of scientists on how their science should be conducted. These requirements were different in various periods. Laudan gives the example of the transition from the inductivist methodology to the hypothetico-deductive methodology. Inductivism forbids positing the existence of unobservable entities. However, scientists in the 19th Century were positing the existence of many unobservable entities including atoms and the force of gravity. Laudan subsequently argues that we should focus on the actual expectations of the scientific community rather than the explicit expectations scientists say they possess.