A good book may have the power to change the way we see the world, but a great book actually becomes part of our daily consciousness, pervading our thinking to the point that we take it for granted, and we forget how provocative and challenging its ideas once were - and still are. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is that kind of book. When it was first published in 1962, it was a landmark event in the history and philosophy of science. Fifty years later, it still has many lessons to teach.
With The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn challenged long-standing linear notions of scientific progress, arguing that transformative ideas don't arise from the day-to-day, gradual process of experimentation and data accumulation but that the revolutions in science, those breakthrough moments that disrupt accepted thinking and offer unanticipated ideas, occur outside of "normal science", as he called it. Though Kuhn was writing when physics ruled the sciences, his ideas on how scientific revolutions bring order to the anomalies that amass over time in research experiments are still instructive in our biotech age.
Note: This new edition of Kuhn's essential work in the history of science includes an insightful introduction by Ian Hacking, which clarifies terms popularized by Kuhn, including paradigm and incommensurability, and applies Kuhn's ideas to the science of today.
©1996 The University of Chicago; (P)2009 Audible, Inc.
"A landmark in intellectual history which has attracted attention far beyond its own immediate field." (Science)
"Perhaps the best explanation of [the] process of discovery." (New York Times Book Review)
Yes. This book provides an insight into the scientific process and how scientific ideas evolve over time. It's a nice reminder to the public and to those in scientific fields that 'fact' can be dictated by politics and social pressures of the day. Nothing is fixed and science is a dynamic field that makes mistakes, evolves, and changes.
No, unless you have no other choice. Actually reading this one will be time better spent, that is, at least in regard to this audio version.
This is a very important book in regard to understanding the history and philosophy of science.
Certainly not Dennis Holland as he does a horrible job. His performance comes off as a cluelessly peppy version of the Captain Kirk parodied in "Family Guy."
If you want to absorb the info in this book, pick up a print copy.
I put it down 1 hour into it. Counterintuitive. I should have read all of the other reviews prior to purchase!
Probably nothing, the theses and topic just wasn't for me. I'm not a philosopher and have little respect for mind benders.
Boredom and amazement that people would try to "interpret" science, which is all about pushing aside interpretation and dealing with bare facts and truths.
Give me science, or give me death!
This book is exceedingly boring. The same few anecdotes from history are discussed over and over, but nothing conclusive or provable is discovered. It is richly philosophical, but in the way that puts off a scientific mind and does not inspire curiosity or profound thought. If you like to read science, skip it. If you can't sleep, give it a read.
This book was advertized as a book that would appeal to all readers, not just those who are scientists. I do not agree. Although I consider myself to be a well educated person who loves reading non-fiction, this book was boring and way over my head, not to mention a waste of money!
Report Inappropriate Content