Atomism and the illusion of crisis: The danger of applying Kuhnian categories to current particle physics

Philosophy of Science 48 (3):454-468 (1981)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper responds to a recent claim by Shrader-Frechette that current particle physics, with its essentially atomist paradigm, is in a state of Kuhnian crisis. We respond to Shrader-Frechette's claim in two ways: first, we argue directly against much of the evidence used by Shrader-Frechette as indicators of Kuhnian crisis; second, we question Shrader-Frechette's application of Kuhnian categories to current research in general, pointing out the dangers inherent in such an analysis

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
60 (#262,991)

6 months
5 (#638,139)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Reflections on my critics In I. LAKATOS & A. MUSGROVE, Eds.T. Kuhn - 1970 - In Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge [Eng.]: Cambridge University Press. pp. 231--278.
Against'normal science'.John Wn Watkins - 1970 - In Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge [Eng.]: Cambridge University Press.

Add more references