The philosopher and historian of science Thomas Kuhn proposed in 1962 the concept of paradigm of a, or all, the science. Paradigm comes from greek παράδειγμα paràdeigma and means pattern, example, sample.
Huhn defines a scientific paradigm as: "... what is shared by members of a scientific community, and conversely, a scientific community consists of those who share a certain paradigm."
 |
| Ironic cartoon on the different views on science between Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn. |
More generally, a paradigm can be described as a "constellation of beliefs shared by a group", or "a constellation of findings, concepts, values, techniques etc.. shared by a scientific community to define legitimate problems and solutions".
As such, a paradigm has a fundamental influence on the methodology in which design, construct and discusses the validity of any experiment or scientific description, and then defines what is significant and what is not, what is considered science and what is not:
"...paradigm ... is the systematic articulation of a set of practical tools and concepts, and an a priori definition of the object and its rules of experimental manipulation"
(I. Stengers)
Kuhn defines a scientific revolution as a paradigm shift. The transition from a science experienced as paradigmatic belief stems from a subsequent appearance of "anomalies " theoretical and/or experimental, leading to questioning of the paradigm and the development of a broader science. Periods like this have happened many times in the history of science, Kuhn makes several classic examples such as Copernican revolution, the revolution of modern chemistry by Lavoisier, the revolution of electrostatics by Franklin, the Darwin revolution or the Theory of Relativity by Einstein.
A paradigm can be changed by a subsequent paradigm, more general, such as the Copernican system, with the earth revolving around the sun, is valid if the reference system is placed in the center of the sun, if it is placed in the center of the earth continues to be valid the geocentric model, neither has absolute validity but still relative, it depends from where is more convenient to place the reference system, that is the system that makes the simplest possible the equations of motion. Actually, the most convenient point is neither on earth nor in the sun, but in center of mass of the Sun-Earth system, at about 450.000 Km from the sun center on the sun-earth line, where the two gravitational forces cancel each other, also called Lagrangian point. The heliocentric system is therefore no more "right" than the geocentric, simply is more convenient for the description and the calculation of the gravitational field equations.
The paradigm shift and the resulting scientific revolution are not just abstract theoretical concepts but they have profound impacts on the every day lives since they are the source of the subsequent development of technologies:
Isabelle Stengers points out that for the science of Complexity we can not define a paradigm. Defined a complex system as:
"According to Atlan a complicated system is a system we understand the structure and operating principles: in principle nothing prevent that with time and money one can come to have a full knowledge of it.
On the contrary, the complex system is the one where we have a general perception, in terms of which we can identify and qualify, even though we know we do not understand it in its details"
In a system of this kind:
"The separation between what is meaningful and what is noise can be no longer founder, made once and for all in the name of a general theory, it should be thought as such for each single system.
Therefore what is questioned is the paradigmatic character of theories, namely their ability to drive a process from identifying similarities in themselves indicating a way of separating and handling"
In the distinction of simple/complicated/complex then only the first two are calculable, exactly the first, the second potentially or statistically. In a complex system is hard to tell what is noise and what is significant, because the noise, or chaos, can generate those emergent properties peculiar of complexity. It follows the impossibility of a calculation and description methodology, valid for all systems - or, at least, within the same class - but only a specific one for a specific system. This is one of the peculiar difficulties of Complexity: the uniqueness of each complex system.
Isabelle Stengers, "Why can not there be a paradigm of complexity", in G.Bocchi, M.Ceruti (edt.s)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.