43
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Scope of Scientonomy - Time Fields and Scale (view source)
Revision as of 19:33, 30 November 2018
, 19:33, 30 November 2018no edit summary
Lakatos's methodology which heavily involved the notion of confirmed novel predictions in theory acceptance is hardly applicable to pre-16th century science such as Aristotelian-Medieval science where novel predictions played little to no role.[[CiteRef::Lakatos (1978a)|p. 195]] Lakatos also divides the sciences through his own demarcation between 'mature sciences' and 'immature sciences' where his research programmes are only present in the more mature sciences.[[CiteRef::Lakatos (1978a)|p. 87]] Lakatos divides the scale of scientific change into the large changes experienced by the hard core and the smaller shifts of the protective belt or auxiliary hypotheses.[[CiteRef::Lakatos (1978a)|p. 33]]
The VPI project which compared many theories of science against historical episodes restricted itself to post-16th century science.[[CiteRef::Donovan, Laudan and Laudan (Eds.) (1988)|p. 149]] However, it ostensibly applied to all fields of inquiry.[[CiteRef::Donovan, Laudan and Laudan (Eds.) (1988)|pp. 159-160]] The VPI project also distinguished between major and minor changes in science.[[CiteRef::Donovan, Laudan and Laudan (Eds.) (1988)|p. xii]]
Kuhn’s theory was intended to apply to ancient and medieval science as well as post-16th century science.[[CiteRef::Kuhn (1996)|pp. 2-3]] Kuhn restricted himself to to mature physical sciences, despite his theory being applicable to more fields.[[CiteRef::Nickles (1986)|p. 254]] Kuhn draws the line between transitions occurring in normal science and revolutionary transitions between paradigms.[[CiteRef::Kuhn (1996)|pp. 66-76]]
