Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T17:54:05.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Paradigms and Barriers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2023

Howard Margolis
Howard Margolis*
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Having for thirty years believed and taught the doctrine of phlogiston… I for a long time felt inimical to the new system, which represented as absurd that which I hitherto regarded as sound doctrine; but this enmity… springs only from force of habit… [Black to Lavoisier, 1791]

This paper is abstracted from a forthcoming book which defends a particular answer to the question of just what it is that shifts when a paradigm shifts. The claim is that what shifts are habits of mind. And in particular the claim is that the most striking cases of paradigm shift will characteristically turn on a shift in some single, uniquely critical, habit of mind: the barrier. An account of a radical discovery — discovery that prompts the Kuhnian symptoms of incommensurability, so that intuitions that seem irresistible to some seem perverse to their rivals — then characteristically turns on how some individual got past the barrier (escaped the critical habit of mind), while at least for a while others could not do so.

Type
Part XI. Implications of the Cognitive Sciences for Philosophy of Science
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1990 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1990 , 1990 , pp. 431 - 440
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1991

Footnotes

1

Support from the Program in History and Philosophy of Science, National Science Foundation is gratefully acknowledged. I am indebted to Tom Nickles for providing the occasion to write this summary, and (without implying agreement with the result) I am indebted to Nickles, David Hull and Thomas Kuhn for valuable comments.

References

Giere, R. (1988), Understanding Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gregory, J.C. (1934), Combustion from Heracleitos to Lavoisier. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1977), “A Function for Thought Experiments, in The Essential Tension.” Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolis, H. (1988), Patterns, Thinking & Cognition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Margolis, H. (1991). “Tycho’s System and Galileo’s Dialogue”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 22: 259–275.Google Scholar
Margolis, H. (forthcoming). Paradigms and Barriers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neugebauer, O. (1968), “On the Planetary Theory of Copernicus”, Vistas in Astronomy 10: 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, P. (1990), “The Conceptual Structure of the Chemical Revolution”. Philosophy of Science 57:183–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar