Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

PL EN


2016 | 16 | 211-228

Article title

Ewolucja pojęcia paradygmatu w Strukturze rewolucji naukowych Thomasa S. Kuhna

Content

Title variants

RU
Эволюция понятия парадигмы в Томаса С. Куна «Структура научных революций»
EN
Evolution of the Notion of Paradigm in Thomas S. Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

Languages of publication

PL

Abstracts

RU
Томас C. Кун неоднократно переписывал текст «Структура научных революций», прежде чем он решил напечатать его. В статье автор обсуждает несколько важных различий между различными правками «Структуры ...» относительно исследуемой категории. Он также показывает, когда Кун впервые использовал этот термин, и указывает важные различия между рукописями «Структуры ...» и текстом, опубликованным в 1962 году. Автор показывает также некоторые характеристики парадигмы как догмы и объясняет, почему Кун отказались от них в «Структуре ...». Наконец-то обсуждает последствия неоднозначного использования этой категории.
EN
Kuhn repeatedly redrafted the text of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions before he decided to print it. In this article, the author discussed several important differences between the various editings of The Structure… concerning the investigated category. He also showed when Kuhn has used that term for the first time, as well as he indicates important differences between the manuscript of The Structure… and the text published in 1962. He also showed certain characteristics of the paradigm as a dogma and explain why Kuhn has abandoned it in The Structure…. Finally the author discusses the consequences of ambiguous use of that category.

Year

Volume

16

Pages

211-228

Physical description

Contributors

  • Uniwersytet Zielonogórski

References

  • Anor Kristianne C. 2012. „Science: A Greatest Integer Function – A Cumulative Approach to the Inquisitive Punctuated. Nature of Science”. Stance 5: 27−28.
  • Borradori Giovanna. 1994. The American Philosopher. Conversations with Quine, Davidson, Putnam, Nozick, Danto, Rorty, Cavell, MacIntyre, and Kuhn. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Crombie Alistair C. (ed.). 1963. Scientific Change. Historical Studies in the Intellectual, Social and Technical Conditions for Scientific Discovery and Technical Invention, from Antiquity to The Present. Heinemann, London: Heinemann.
  • Gattei Stefano. 2008. Thomas Kuhn’s „Linguistic Turn” and the Legacy of Logical Empiri-cism. Incommensurability, Rationality and the Search for Truth. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company.
  • Hai Hong. 2009. „Kuhn and the Two Cultures of Western and Chinese Medicine”. Journal of Cambridge Studies 4 (3): 10–35.
  • Hoyningen-Huene Paul. 1996. „Obituary of Thomas S. Kuhn (1922−1996)”. Erkenntnis 45 (2−3): v-viii.
  • Jodkowski Kazimierz. 1983. „Pojęcie paradygmatu a wspólnotowy charakter nauki w ujęciu Thomasa S. Kuhna”. Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska VIII (sectio I): 43−44.
  • Jodkowski Kazimierz. 1990. „Popper a Kuhn w sprawie wzrostu wiedzy”. Zagadnienia Na-ukoznawstwa 3: 464−465.
  • Jodkowski Kazimierz. 1990. „Wspólnoty uczonych, paradygmaty i rewolucje naukowe”. W Realizm, Racjonalność, Relatywizm. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.
  • Jodkowski Kazimierz. 2003. Metafizyczne opowieści nauki jako fundament pluralizmu na-ukowego. Warszawa: Polskie Towarzystwo Kreacjonistyczne.
  • Kilian Krzysztof. J. 2014. Poglądy filozoficzne Paula K. Feyerabenda. Część I. Program me-todologiczny. Zielona Góra: Oficyna Wydawnicza Uniwersytetu Zielonogórskiego.
  • Kuhn Thomas S. 1966. Przewrót kopernikański. Astronomia planetarna w dziejach myśli. Warszawa: PWN.
  • Kuhn Thomas. S. 1985. Dwa bieguny: tradycja i nowatorstwo w badaniach naukowych. War-szawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy.
  • Kuhn Thomas S. 1995. The Copernican Revolution. Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  • Loving Cathleen C., Cobern William W. 2000. „Invoking Thomas Kuhn: What Citation Analysis Reveals about Science Education”. Science and Education 9: 187–206.
  • Marcum James A. 2005. Thomas Kuhn’s Revolution: An Historical Philosophy of Science. London − New York: Continuum.
  • Margolis Eric. 1976. Paradigms, Disciplines and Human Understanding. University of Ne-braska Press.
  • Marx Werner, Bornmann Lutz. 2010. „How accurately does Thomas Kuhn’s model of para-digm change describe the transition from the static view of the universe to the big bang theory in cosmology? A historical reconstruction and citation analysis”. Scientometrics 84: 441–464.
  • Masterman Margaret. 1970. The Nature of Paradigm. London: Cambridge University Press.
  • Merton Robert. 1941. „The Social Role of the Man of Knowledge by Florian Znaniecki”. American Sociological Review 6 (1): 111−115.
  • Moleski Martin X. SJ. 2006–2007. „Polanyi vs. Kuhn: Worldviews Apart”. Tradition & Dis-covery. The Polanyi Society Periodical 33 (2): 8−24.
  • Preston John, Munévar Gonzalo, Lamb David (eds.). 2000. The Worst Enemy of Science.
  • Essays in Memory of Paul Feyerabend. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Sady Wojciech. 2010. „Kuhn kontra Fleck a Maxwellowska rewolucja w elektrodynamice”. Przegląd Filozoficzny − Nowa Seria 2: 103–131.
  • Taylor Calvin W. 1959. The Third (1959) University of Utah Research Conference on the Identification of Creative Scientific Talent. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
  • Vihalemm Rein. 2000. „The Kuhn-loss Thesis and the Case of Phlogiston Theory”. Science Studies 13 (1): 68−78.
  • Woodcock Leslie V. 2005. „Phlogiston Theory and Chemical Revolutions”. Bulletin for the History of Chemistry 30 (2): 63−69.
  • Wray Brad K. 2011. Kuhn’s Evolutionary Social Epistemology. New York: Cambridge Uni-versity Press.

Document Type

Publication order reference

Identifiers

YADDA identifier

bwmeta1.element.desklight-f7ebad41-5614-4c00-8b2c-95e65d336ba0
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.