I examine the value and limitations of Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions. In the interests of developing a social epistemology of science, I argue that we should draw on Kuhn’s later work, published in The Road since Structure. There, Kuhn draws attention to the important role that specialty formation plays in resolving crises in science, a topic he did not discuss in Structure. I argue that we need to develop a better understanding of specialty research communities. Kuhn’s later work provides (...) a research agenda for those who want to study scientific specialization. I briefly discuss some recent studies that promise to provide valuable insight into the social structure of science. (shrink)

In his mature works, Kuhn abandons the concept of a paradigm and becomes more interested in the analysis of the conceptual structure of scientific theories. These changes are interpreted as resulting from a ‘linguistic turn’ that Kuhn underwent sometimes around the 1980s. Much of the philosophical discussions about Kuhn’s post-‘linguistic turn’ philosophy revolves around his views on taxonomic concepts. Apart from taxonomy, however, the mature Kuhn introduces other concepts, such as conceptual networks and lexicons. This article distinguishes these three concepts (...) and shows that adopting each one of them has different impacts on Kuhn’s model of science. After distinguishing and assessing the concepts of taxonomy, network, and lexicon, it will be argued that the latter not only fits the Kuhnian model of science better, but it also helps capture the wide sense of Kuhn’s early concept of a paradigm. (shrink)

In his account of scientific revolutions, Thomas Kuhn suggests that after a revolutionary change of theory, it is as if scientists are working in a different world. In this paper, we aim to show that the notion of world change is insightful. We contrast the reporting of the discovery of neon in 1898 with the discovery of hafnium in 1923. The one discovery was made when elements were identified by their atomic weight; the other discovery was made after scientists came (...) to classify elements by their atomic number. By considering two instances of the reporting of the discovery of a new chemical element 25 years apart, we argue that it becomes clear how chemists can be said to have been responding to different worlds as a result of the change in the concept of a chemical element. They saw, did, and reported different things as they conducted their research on the new chemical elements. (shrink)

Ova filozofska analiza psihoterapijskih pristupa temelji se na tezi o znanstvenolikosti životne filozofije. Filozofija života je koncept koji je prisutan u svakoj važnijoj psihoterapiji, bilo na jasan bilo na implicitan način. Rabili smo nekoliko načina istraživanja filozofske pozadine psihoterapija: povijesnu i konceptualnu analizu, dvofaktorski model ontološko-epistemološkog prostora, socijalne mreže i filozofske škole i njihov utjecaj na povijest psihologije, te neke specifične probleme iz područja filozofije znanosti. U završnom odjeljku smo analizirali pokret filozofskog savjetovanja. Istražili smo njegove značajke, te poveznice s (...) psihoterapijom.This philosophical analysis of psychotherapeutic approaches is based upon thesis of scientific character of one’s philosophy of life. Notion of philosophy of life is present in each major psychotherapeutic approach, in either explicit or implicit matter.Modes of philosophical inquiry include historical and concept analysis, two factor model of ontological-epistemological space, social networks in the philosophical schools and their impact on the history of psychology, and some specific issues in the philosophy of science.Finally, philosophical counseling movement is examined. What is typical for this movement and what sort of connections does it have with psychotherapy is covered. (shrink)

I examine the value and limitations of Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions. In the interests of developing a social epistemology of science, I argue that we should draw on Kuhn’s later work, published in The Road since Structure. There, Kuhn draws attention to the important role that specialty formation plays in resolving crises in science, a topic he did not discuss in Structure. I argue that we need to develop a better understanding of specialty research communities. Kuhn’s later work provides (...) a research agenda for those who want to study scientific specialization. I briefly discuss some recent studies that promise to provide valuable insight into the social structure of science. (shrink)