英文摘要 |
This paper is a response to Chen Ruey-Lin’ s three challenges to Kuhn’ s concept of paradigm: (1) There is no clear distinction between articulations of an old paradigm and a revolutionary theory. (2) Using a paradigm to represent a particular school in science history is difficult. (3) Kuhn’ s view of epistemic values cannot offer a reasonable causal account of scientists’ consensus on a new paradigm. In order to resolve these challenges, I examine recent developments in Kuhnian philosophy of science. Brad Wray uses Kuhn’ s later concept of lexicon to represent and understand scientific revolutions, while Darrell Rowbottom proposes partial paradigms to explain how science changes in a piecemeal way. However, I argue that both developments are insufficient to overcome all of Chen’ s challenges. Therefore, I propose an approach for analyzing individual scientists’ similarities and differences in “ working groups” and I illustrate this concept by examining such working groups in the history before and after the birth of special relativity. This approach is a bottom-up strategy, reconstructing the similarities and differences among scientists in a particular context. |