The Kuhnian Image of Science

Moti Mizrahi put together a provocative volume which will be of interest to anyone concerned with Kuhn and his legacy in philosophy of science.  The volume offers a philosophical critique and reassessment of Kuhn, one of the figures most often associated with the historical and social practice perspectives in philosophy of science.  At stake is nothing less than whether or not science is a progressive and rational enterprise. -- Ehud Lamm, Senior Lecturer at The Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas, Tel Aviv University
This collection on Kuhn’s work and its influence includes a healthy plurality of reactions, from very negative responses to elaborations that find enduring value in Kuhn’s work. Mizrahi has done a great job with this timely collection, which will benefit seminars on science studies, the acceptance and rejection of ideas, and theory change, as well as readers interested in the philosophy of science in general. -- Alberto Cordero, Professor of Philosophy at CUNY Graduate Center and Queens College, City University of New York
Is Thomas Kuhn's theory of ‘scientific revolutions’ in fact supported by the historical track record? Do paradigm shifts really render past and present theories incommensurable? By addressing these and related questions, the essays collected in The Kuhnian Image of Science, make a provocative case for the need to reassess the scope and validity of Kuhn's theories. As such, the book is a must-read for anyone interested in the scientific method and its complexities. -- Axel Gelfert, Associate Professor of Philosophy, National University of Singapore
This collection offers a new critical engagement with some of the most puzzling aspects of Thomas Kuhn’s influential views on science. The authors offer novel insights into the questions of scientific knowledge and theory change, both challenging and developing Kuhn’s original positions. This is a good resource for anyone interested in the nature of scientific knowledge. -- Milena Ivanova, Postdoctoral Fellow in Philosophy at LMU Munich
This compelling collection asks whether Kuhn failed by his own standards, cherry-picking his examples and massively over-generalizing—then passing his sins on to a bruised discipline that thought emulating Kuhn would correct these very errors. The contributors ask awkward questions, which must be asked; the treatments are sensitive and scholarly. The book is both provocative and deep: paradigm-shifting material. -- Alex Broadbent, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Johannesburg
Mizrahi has curated an exciting and provocative volume on that icon of the philosophy of science—Thomas Kuhn’s image of science. These essays challenge that image and defend that image; they criticize it and they develop it. The reader will come away stimulated and with a deeper understanding not only of Kuhn’s conception of science but also of science itself. -- Alexander Bird, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Bristol
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is the most influential book ever published in philosophy of science. This splendid volume, with high-quality contributions from well-known philosophers of science, offers a plurality of responses to Kuhn’s classic. While some contributors challenge his account of scientific development and attempt to supersede it, others defend and refine it. A welcome addition to Kuhn scholarship. -- Theodore Arabatzis, Professor of the History and Philosophy of Science at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
Finally, a serious critique of the Kuhnian image of science! The important question of whether the Kuhnian image of science allows us to adequately examine interaction between the social practices of scientists and the epistemic practices scientists engage in is finally put on the table, alongside a fiery critique of the true nature of the historical aspects of Kuhn’s account of science. -- Emma Ruttkamp-Bloem, Professor of Philosophy and Logic at the University of Pretoria
This book provoked interesting questions for me, regarding the nature of historiography, proper use of case studies, and implications of the Kuhnian image for science studies. The essays left me more convinced than ever that the concern with semantic incommensurability is a dead end. More fruitful lines of research lie with the study of scientific practice, argumentation, and social-institutional conditions of enquiry. * Metascience *