Bungler on Nostr: ☃️merry chrimist☃️ The problem with the Kuhnian model is it portrays ...
☃️merry chrimist☃️ (npub1pt6…6mf6) The problem with the Kuhnian model is it portrays paradigms as too discrete, when in reality they all tend to bleed into each other. Rather than a cycle of normal science -> crisis -> revolution -> normal science, shifting is constant & on-going in many areas, even if others seem to change in fits & starts. The whole picture the historical record shows, is a v intricate web of continuities & discontinuities, similarities & changes, distributed asymmetrically, not following any idealized pattern as the post-positivists held, but rather filtering through myriads of diverse historical contingencies. We've been living through similar on-going shifting our whole life. No one really understands how the entire process unfolded, but it's clear the whole game of "science", since its invention around the mid 19th century, has been a v unstable, peculiar, multifaceted thing.
Things look stranger when you look up close at publications, bc you find that even researchers in the same field, publishing in the same journals, don't agree with each other, often about what even the terms they are using mean, purportedly in the context of the same "paradigm".
The questioner's conflating of ontological models with technology isn't surprising as this is one of the conflations underlying the social concept of "science". But it's no surprise technological innovation has slowed, again to diverse factors, but esp bc research gets more expensive as the low-hanging fruit is gathered up, & resources become more scarce. I guess he thought it was destined that we'd just find this bread-crumb trail of exploitable phenomena that would lead us to galactic conquest or s/t. Wait, "terrifying for humanity"? Bc he can't create his favorite sci-fi dystopia IRL?
Things look stranger when you look up close at publications, bc you find that even researchers in the same field, publishing in the same journals, don't agree with each other, often about what even the terms they are using mean, purportedly in the context of the same "paradigm".
The questioner's conflating of ontological models with technology isn't surprising as this is one of the conflations underlying the social concept of "science". But it's no surprise technological innovation has slowed, again to diverse factors, but esp bc research gets more expensive as the low-hanging fruit is gathered up, & resources become more scarce. I guess he thought it was destined that we'd just find this bread-crumb trail of exploitable phenomena that would lead us to galactic conquest or s/t. Wait, "terrifying for humanity"? Bc he can't create his favorite sci-fi dystopia IRL?