The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|book review|}}
{{a|book review|}}
===Small and perfectly formed: one of the greats of 20th Century Philosophy===
===Small and perfectly formed: one of the great works of modern philosophy===
{{br|The Structure of Scientific Revolutions}} —{{author|Thomas Kuhn}}
{{author|Thomas Kuhn}}’s {{br|The Structure of Scientific Revolutions}} is a true classic of modern literature. This wonderful little book, which argues for the contingency of scientific knowledge, deserves space on the bookshelf next to [[Adam Smith]]’s ''The Wealth of Nations'' (identifying the contingency of economic value), [[David Hume]]’s ''A Treatise of Human Nature'' (the contingency of cause), Charles Darwin’s {{br|The Origin of Species}} (the contingency of biology) and Richard Rorty’s ''Contingency, Irony and Solidarity'' (the contingency of language) — along with those perennially confusing continental stalwarts {{author|Friedrich Nietzsche}} and {{author|Ludwig Wittgenstein}} as representing the fundamental underpinnings of modern pragmatic thought.
 
 
A true classic of Twentieth Century literature, this wonderful little book, which argues for the contingency of scientific knowledge, deserves space on the bookshelf next to {{br|The Wealth of Nations}} (identifying the [[contingency]] of economic wellbeing and value), Hume’s {{br|A Treatise of Human Nature}} (causal scepticism), {{br|The Origin of Species}} (the contingency of biological development) and {{br|Contingency, Irony and Solidarity}} (the contingency of language) — along with those perennially confusing continental stalwarts {{author|Friedrich Nietzsche}} and {{author|Ludwig Wittgenstein}}, as representing the fundamental underpinnings of modern pragmatic thought.


“Pragmatism”, to my mind, is a euphemism for “[[relativism]]”, a dirty word these days, blamed for much of the polarisation and wokitude of our times — wrongly, in my view.
“Pragmatism”, to my mind, is a euphemism for “[[relativism]]”, a dirty word these days, blamed for much of the polarisation and wokitude of our times — wrongly, in my view.