Scientific Revolution

The scientific concept of revolution generally indicates a discontinuity of the scientific thought of a given time, this rupture leading a disciplinary field - or several - to reorganize around Principe S and new Axiome S. This concept became central in epistemology by the work of authors such as Gaston Bachelard, Thomas Kuhn or Alexandre Koyré. In History of sciences, it is used today to describe the mechanisms of transformation and adaptation of the scientific theories following important discoveries, calling into question the vision which the Man hitherto had of the world.

Historical elements

Uses

In the literature, reference is very often made by the simple expression of “scientific Revolution” to the upheavals which took place of 16th at the 18th centuries in several fields of sciences: it acts in fact of the revolution mechanist, often called the Révolution copernician. Historically, it is undoubtedly one of the greatest scientific revolutions for the contemporary historians of sciences.

The question of knowing if the great scientific evolutions of older times (for example, the invention of the zero) are to be considered on the same plan remains open. In addition, each discipline or almost has its modern revolutions: invention of the infinitesimal calculus, discovered Genetic , appearance of the relativism and quanta are described often today like revolutions. For as much, all these evolutions were not done in rupture, far is necessary some. The current direction of revolution is thus closed less than its historical meaning, since it indicates a variety of evolutions considered as major and founders of a new science in science.

History of the concept of revolution in science

The term of “revolution” is of everyday usage since the 18th century. In the Encyclopedia, several authors describe the contributions of scientists such Newton like revolutions in science, i.e. like initiating the one time beginning. The direction evolves/moves under the feather of scientists, historians of sciences and philosophers. Thus, Kant describes the passage of a geocentric system with heliocentric like the Révolution copernician in her Critique of the pure reason .

At the 20th century, the concept of revolution scientific is reconsidered to stick to more close with the great scientific evolutions which follow one another quickly since the middle of the 19th century. Thomas Kuhn observes that the great theoretical changes utilize not a continuous replanning of the concepts and axioms in place, but of the frank ruptures of which the manifest goal is the replacement of a paradigm put in failure by another, more effective and innovative. By paradigm, Kuhn includes/understands at the same time the pure scientific contents and the social organization and technique supporting this science. This integrating plexus makes it possible Kuhn to oppose normal science, in stable situation, productive, with “extraordinary” science, in crisis situation, innovating and leading to a theoretical rupture.

Within this epistemological framework, one distinguishes the vision from Kuhn, where the rupture is not included/understood specifically in term of projection, but of standpoint (the actors of the revolutions make a scientific choice which can be criticized), and the vision of Bachelard, where the scientific revolutions are the engine of the progress of humanity (the actors of the scientific revolutions tend towards a better knowledge and a more complete approximation of the truth)

Random links: