New York: Springer. Kuhn, T. S. (). Struktura znanstvenih revolucija [The Structure of Scientific Revolutions] Zagreb: Jesenski i Turk. Mills, C. Wright () . KUHN, Thomas S. (). Struktura znanstvenih revolucija /Structure of scientific revolutions/. Zagreb: Naklada Jesenski i Turk, Hrvatsko sociološko društvo. Kuhn Thomas S Structura Revolutiilor Stiintifice. Report . thomas s. kuhn – struktura znanstvenih Documents · 6 thomas s kuhn.

Author: Shaktilrajas Kegar
Country: Lesotho
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Relationship
Published (Last): 14 May 2011
Pages: 318
PDF File Size: 6.46 Mb
ePub File Size: 7.82 Mb
ISBN: 675-4-44489-141-7
Downloads: 49020
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: JoJonos

We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Published by Reyna Staff Modified over 3 years ago. In this sense, science may refer to a highly skilled technique, technology, or practice. The Western mind, by contrast, uses speculation and logic. For example, when a building suddenly collapses and people who happen to be under its roof are injured, they say this happening is due to witchcraft.

Evans-Pritchard argued that this witchcraft explanation supplies a missing link. The Azande know these two facts: However, the Azande need an explanation that also connects these two events, and that explanation is witchcraft. Besides anthropological values, this ethnography Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande has been a primary point of reference in philosophical arguments about rationality and relativism.

Das mag in der Theorie richtig strujtura, taugt aber nicht fur die Praxis Berlinische Monatsschrift, Evolution is a fact in the same sense that it’s znanstvrnih fact that the Earth is round and not flat, [that] the Earth steuktura round the Sun.

Both those are also znnstvenih, but they’re theories that have never been disproved and never will be disproved.

Thomas Kuhn’s Influence on Astronomers

That implies that you are making the assumption that God needs an explanation. Hawking has pointed towards an explanation of the universe. But questions that begin “What is the purpose of You cannot apply such a question to mountains or avalanches or tsunamis or the universe This is not surprising, as God is invariably defined in such a way as to put Him beyond the reach of rational enquiry. Richard, tsunami, i see no divine or godly purpose whatsoever in a tsunami. Stephen Hawking Stephen Hawking.

Apsorbiraju istu literaturu 4. Quoting from Carl Hewitt, Scientific Community Metaphor systems have characteristics of monotonicity, concurrency, commutativity, pluralism, skepticism and provenance. Once something is published it cannot be undone.

Thomas Kuhn – Wikipedija, prosta enciklopedija

Scientists publish their results so they are available to all. Published work is collected and indexed in libraries. Scientists who change their mind can publish later articles contradicting earlier ones. Scientists can work concurrently, overlapping in time and interacting with each other. Publications can be read regardless of whether they initiate new research or become relevant eevolucija ongoing research.

Scientists who become interested in a scientific question typically make an effort to find out if the answer has already been published. In addition they attempt to keep abreast of further developments as they continue their work. Publications include heterogeneous, overlapping and possibly conflicting information. There is no central arbiter znansfvenih truth in scientific communities. Great effort is expended to test and validate current information and replace it with better information.

The provenance of information is carefully tracked and recorded. For many others, Max Weber ‘s concept of value relevance provides a guiding principle; he argued that it is all but impossible for researchers to keep their values from entering into observations and analyses.

The very process of selecting a research topic, for example, is influenced by researchers’ personal backgrounds, interests, and experiences. More radical than Weber’s position are the variety of interventionist approaches to social research, which promote the empowerment of subordinate or oppressed social groups.

Weber On the question of bias, Weber again provides an influential example. Although he believed in the principle of value relevance, he also maintained that value neutrality should be upheld in the research process; this means that once the research begins, researchers should not let their personal values influence the collection and analysis of data, and they should not hide or change research findings that rwvolucija contrary to their beliefs or expectations.


At this point, the question is no longer confined strukturq the issue of objectivity but involves complex ethical issues as well. Taj vjerski stav ima funkciju opravdanja zn. Popper holds that empirical theories are characterized by falsifiability. Science may be described as the art of systematic over-simplification Whenever a theory appears to you as the only possible one, take this as a sign that revklucija have neither understood the theory nor the problem which it was intended to solve.

It was the publication of Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions inhowever, which fully opened the strujtura of science to new disciplines by suggesting that the evolution of science was in part sociologically determined and that it did not operate under the simple logical laws put forward by the logical positivist school of khhn.

Kuhn attributed much of this process to the interactions and strategies of the human participants in science rather than its own innate logical structure. See sociology of scientific knowledge and Theories and sociology of the history of science.

InJerome Ravetz published Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems, a book describing the role that the scientific community, as a social construct, plays in accepting or rejecting so-called “objective” scientific knowledge. Postojanje takvih faza je konstanta. Predparadigmatska faza razdoblje prije konsenzusa. Normalna znanost razdoblje konsenzusa. Napredak putem revolucionarnog znanja tako je destruktivno-konstruktivan, a nije kumulativan.

U drugim prilikama relevantno rasvjetljenje dolazi u snu. These different connotations of the term raise znahstvenih number of fundamental questions about the goals and methods of research: This question pits positivism against the many types of research that emphasize the role of cognitive, cultural, or linguistic structures as the mediators of experience and the constituent features of social reality; 2 a corollary to the first question: Is it possible to produce universal knowledge claims about social systems that are analogous to those claims in the natural sciences?

This has been a crucial subject in sociology and especially anthropology, where differences between qualitative and quantitative work are sharp and where the barriers of cultural difference are often high; and 4 Is it possible to keep research procedures free from bias?

How can one minimize the tendency of questioners to solicit or steer respondents toward preconceived answers? Much depends on the significance accorded language or symbolic behavior as a mediator of experience and znanstvenig an inevitably unreliable or partial medium of communication.

This has been one of the key contributions of modern philosophy to recent debates in the social sciences—following the so-called linguistic turn of both continental and Anglo-American philosophy in the mid- twentieth century. The question remains central, too, to debates about poststructuralism and postmodernism.

Rather than being held up as heroes of knowledge, many scientists of the past were scrutinized for their connection to issues of gender, sexual orientation, race, and class. Some more radical philosophers, such as Paul Feyerabend, argued that scientific theories were themselves incoherent and that other forms of knowledge production such as those used in religion served the material and spiritual needs of their practitioners with as equal validity as did scientific explanations.

For Lakatos, scientific knowledge is progressive; however, it progresses not by a strict linear path where every new element builds upon and incorporates every other, but by an approach where a “core” of a “research program” is established by auxiliary theories which can themselves be falsified or replaced without compromising the core.

KUHN by pavle pavlovic on Prezi

Social conditions and attitudes affect how strongly one attempts to resist falsification for the core of a program, but the program has an objective status, notwithstanding, based on its relative explanatory power. Cultural relativism is widely accepted in modern anthropology. Cultural relativists believe that all cultures are worthy in their own right and are of equal value. Diversity of cultures, even those with conflicting moral beliefs, is not to be considered in terms of right and wrong or good and bad.


Cultural relativism is closely related to ethical relativism, which views truth as variable and not absolute. What constitutes right and wrong is determined solely by the individual or by society. Since truth is not objective, there can be no objective standard which applies to all cultures. No one can say if someone else is right or wrong; it is a matter of personal opinion, and no society can pass judgment on another society.

Cultural relativism sees nothing inherently wrong and nothing inherently good with any cultural expression. Human Rights as currently defined are not universal but based on Western morality. There exist profound differences between western legal theories and cultures and those of Africa, Asia, India and Islam.

In order to fully understand a culture, one must be a znanstvenh of that culture. There can be no universal meaning to a moral value. A universal text on values is a futile exercise. Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity”, an article proposing that quantum gravity has progressive political implications, and that the “morphogenetic field” a New Age concept by Rupert Sheldrake could be a cutting-edge theory of quantum gravity.

He concluded that, since “physical reality” is, at bottom, a social and linguistic construct, a “liberatory science” and an “emancipatory mathematics”, spurning “the elite caste canon of ‘high science'”, must be established for a “postmodern science [that] provide[s] powerful intellectual support for the progressive political project.

Throughout the article, I znxnstvenih scientific and mathematical concepts in ways that few scientists or mathematicians could possibly take seriously. For syruktura, I suggest that the “morphogenetic field” — a bizarre Revoluciia Age idea due to Rupert Sheldrake — constitutes a cutting-edge theory of quantum gravity. This connection is pure invention; even Sheldrake makes no such claim. I assert that Lacan’s psychoanalytic speculations have been confirmed by recent work in quantum field theory.

Even nonscientist readers might well wonder what in heavens’ name quantum field theory has to do with psychoanalysis; certainly my article gives no reasoned argument to support such a link. In sum, I intentionally wrote the article so that any competent physicist or mathematician or undergraduate physics or math major would realize that it is a spoof. Evidently the editors of Social Text felt comfortable publishing an article on quantum physics without bothering to consult anyone knowledgeable in the subject.

I confess that I’m an unabashed Old Leftist who never quite understood how deconstruction was supposed to help the working class. And Znanstvenjh a stodgy old scientist who believes, naively, that there exists an external world, that there exist objective truths about that world, and that my job is to discover some of them.

Experiment is the sole judge of scientific ‘truth’. But what is the source of knowledge?

Where do the laws that are to be tested come from? Experiment, itself, helps to produce these laws, in the sense that it gives us hints. But also needed is imagination to create from these hints the great generalizations — to guess at the wonderful, simple, but very strange patterns beneath them all, and then to experiment to check again whether we have made the right guess. Isto tako sa tvrtke: Das gesellschaftliche Kriterium naturwissenschaftlicher Forschung ist ihre funktionale Anwendbarkeit in Gesellschaft.

Das Interesse bei naturwissenschaftlicher Theorie liegt in ihrer funktionalen Anwendung – im Gegensatz zu gesellschaftswissenschaftlicher Theorie, die Gegenstand politischen Streits ist. Samo mi treba unutarnji mir i trening pa bi mogo pomaknut uho zaustavit revoluccija i letjet. Today, “moral philosophy” is more-or-less synonymous with “ethics”.