Mini-essay 1
Yara Langeveld (2760223) - MPA - MSTS
665 words
Thomas Kuhn’s concept of a paradigm is best described as follows by Sismondo1: “The theoretical
side of a paradigm serves as a worldview, providing categories and frameworks into which to slot
phenomena. The practical side of a paradigm serves as a form of life, providing patterns of behavior
or frameworks for action.” (p.14). This quote illustrates that a paradigm is a way of looking at the
world and provides certain guidelines and boundaries by which people act. Within paradigms,
normal science is conducted by scientists who agree on theories that are right, important
problems and adequate solutions. At some point, members of a paradigm start to consider
alternatives and they view problems and solutions in a different way. This eventually leads to a
revolution, as alternatives to the worldview a paradigm represents become widely accepted and
a new paradigm takes off.
Paradigms involve interpretative flexibility, which indicates scientific findings and knowledge
and technologies can be interpreted in multiple ways2. Because members of a paradigm interpret
knowledge and technologies differently, anomalies within the current paradigm arise, which pile
up to a crisis and eventually lead to a revolution. So, without interpretative flexibility there
cannot be paradigm shifts, thus disruptions in the development of knowledge and technologies,
which is a central component of Kuhn’s theory of paradigms.
Paradigms exist both within the construction of scientific knowledge (EPOR) as well as the
construction of technological artefacts (SCOT). Within the example of Charles Darwin’s Evolution
Theory, there was first consensus that God had created all life, which was the existing paradigm.
People within this paradigm shared the belief that God was responsible for life and scientific
theories and knowledge revolved around this belief. At some point, Darwin questioned this belief
and introduced new findings for understanding the diversity and origins of different species3.
This caused discomfort within the existing paradigm, because people started to interpret
diversity of life differently. By providing comprehensive and compelling evidence for the
Evolution Theory, shifts in thinking and a revolution occurred, because there was consensus
about how natural selection led to the evolution of species, leading to a new paradigm. Even
today, this theory continues to guide research in the field of biology and serves as a worldview.
Within the example of electric cars, this technology can be seen as part of the sustainability
revolution. For decades, humans focused on industrialisation and the exhaustive use of earth’s
resources. The members of this paradigm shared beliefs about achieving the greatest industrial
power, regardless of the environmental consequences. However, as environmental problems and
dilemmas arose, new ways of thinking, organising and acting were required, which caused people
to see the problems and solutions differently4. This caused anomalies within the paradigm and
there was a shift towards a new paradigm of sustainable growth, with electric cars as an
important sustainable technology. As a result, people now have different norms, values and
beliefs about how to use the earth’s resources properly. Therefore, a new worldview exists.
Interpretative flexibility among members within a paradigm does not always have to cause a
crisis and revolution. After all, a paradigm indicates a worldview, which contains many aspects
that people can think differently about, without actually causing a shift to another paradigm.
