Debunking revolutionary paradigm shifts: evidence of cumulative scientific progress across science

Krauss, Alexander ORCID: 0000-0002-1783-2765 (2024) Debunking revolutionary paradigm shifts: evidence of cumulative scientific progress across science. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 480 (2302). ISSN 1364-5021

Text (krauss-2024-debunking-revolutionary-paradigm-shifts-evidence-of-cumulative-scientific-progress-across-science) - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (729kB)

• https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway...
• Scopus publication

Abstract

How can scientific progress be conceived best? Does science mainly undergo revolutionary paradigm shifts? Or is the evolution of science mainly cumulative? Understanding whether science advances through cumulative evolution or through paradigm shifts can influence how we approach scientific research, education and policy. The most influential and cited account of science was put forth in Thomas Kuhn’s seminal book The structure of scientific revolutions. Kuhn argues that science does not advance cumulatively but goes through fundamental paradigm changes in the theories of a scientific field. There is no consensus yet on this core question of the nature and advancement of science that has since been debated across science. Examining over 750 major scientific discoveries (all Nobel Prize and major non-Nobel Prize discoveries), we systematically test this fundamental question about scientific progress here. We find that three key measures of scientific progress—major discoveries, methods and fields—each demonstrate that science evolves cumulatively. First, we show that no major scientific methods or instruments used across fields (such as statistical methods, X-ray methods or chromatography) have been completely abandoned, i.e. subject to paradigm shifts. Second, no major scientific fields (such as biomedicine, chemistry or computer science) have been completely abandoned. Rather, they have all continuously expanded over time, often over centuries, accumulating extensive bodies of knowledge. Third, scientific discoveries including theoretical discoveries are also predominately cumulative, with only 1% of over 750 major discoveries having been abandoned. The continuity of science is most compellingly evidenced by our methods and instruments, which enable the creation of discoveries and fields. We thus offer here a new perspective and answer to this classic question in science and the philosophy and history of science by utilizing methods from statistics and empirical sciences.

Item Type:	Article
Additional Information:	© 2024 The Author(s)
Divisions:	CPNSS
Subjects:	Q Science > Q Science (General) B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General)
Date Deposited:	10 Dec 2024 09:00
Last Modified:	16 Dec 2024 10:24
URI:	http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/126294

Actions (login required)

View Item