Medicine Studies 2 (4):245-263 (2011)

In this paper, I enquire whether there are Kuhnian paradigms in medicine, by way of analysing a case study from the history of medicine—the discovery of the germ theory of disease in the nineteenth century. I investigate the Kuhnian aspects of this event by comparing the work of the famous school of microbiology founded by Robert Koch with a rival school, powerful in the nineteenth century, but now almost forgotten, founded by Carl Nageli. Through my case study, I show that medical science possesses some Kuhnian features. Within each school, scientists used similar exemplars and shared the same assumptions. Moreover, their research was resistant to novelty, and the results of one party were disregarded by the other. In other words, in a moderate sense, the Koch and Nageli groups worked within distinct paradigms. However, I reject the stronger Kuhnian claim that the terms used within the two paradigms were mutually unintelligible. Focusing on the semantic aspects, I argue that no account of incommensurability of reference can be given in this case, although, for sociological reasons, the two parties talked past each other. I suggest in addition that the rival scientists could have understood each other more easily if their theoretical commitments had not been so deeply ingrained, and I use the example of Pasteur to indicate that the causal account of meaning might have avoided the communication breakdown
Keywords Germ theory  Infectious disease  Paradigms  Kuhn  Fleck  Incommensurability  Koch  Pasteur  Nageli
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s12376-011-0063-7
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,039
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - University of Chicago Press.
Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact.Ludwik Fleck - 1979 - University of Chicago Press.
On Clear and Confused Ideas: An Essay About Substance Concepts.Ruth Garrett Millikan - 2000 - Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

View all 32 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

To What Do Psychiatric Diagnoses Refer? A Two-Dimensional Semantic Analysis of Diagnostic Terms.Hane Htut Maung - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 55:1-10.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Carnap and Incommensurability.Stathis Psillos - 2008 - Philosophical Inquiry 30 (1-2):135-156.
Ii. A Reply to Siegel on Kuhnian Relativism.Gerald Doppelt - 1980 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 23 (1):117 – 123.
Newton’s Dynamics, Kuhn, and Incommensurability.Eduardo H. Flichman - 2001 - The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 2001:89-96.
Paradigms, Rationality, and Partial Communication.William H. Austin - 1972 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 3 (2):203-218.
The Kuhnian Mode of HPS.Samuel Schindler - 2013 - Synthese 190 (18):4137-4154.
Unification and Revolution: A Paradigm for Paradigms.Nicholas Maxwell - 2014 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 45 (1):133-149.


Added to PP index

Total views
75 ( #153,796 of 2,505,224 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #209,579 of 2,505,224 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes