Structure of Scientific
Revolution by Thomas Kuhn is a paradigm shifting book (pun intended
since this expression was introduced by Kuhn, and has become part of common exchange
in market exaggerated world where every product has become revolutionary and
every action paradigm shifting. The expression is so misused that Kuhn admitted
that he has “lost control of the word”) written almost six decades back. It is
a must read for anyone interested to know how science works, “essential determinants
of scientific development”, hence it becomes a must read for everyone since
science defines significant aspect of humanity and essentially what is to be a
human in the world we live in. Kuhn points out scientific research as a “strenuous
and devoted attempt to force nature into conceptual boxes supplied by
professional education”. While scientific revolution as “tradition shattering compliments
to the tradition bound activity of normal science”. Copernicus, Newton,
Lavoisier, Maxwell, Einstein so on produced “consequential shift in the
problems available for scientific scrutiny” and “transformed the world within
which scientific work was done”. He adds “its assimilation requires
reconstruction of prior theory and reevaluation prior facts…an intrinsically revolutionary
process is seldom completed by single man and never overnight”. Before streamlined
education famous classic fulfilled a similar function. Works of Aristotle’s Physica,
Ptolemy’s Almagest, Newton’s Principia and Opticks, Franklin’s
Electricity, Levoisier’s Chemistry, and Lyell’s Geology
-these and many other works served for a time implicitly to “define legitimate
problems and methods of research” for succeeding generations of practitioners.
Kuhn elaborates that scientists
normally don’t aim to invent new theories they attempt to “force nature into the
performed and relatively inflexible box that paradigm supplies”, he calls it
normal science as against paradigm-based science. The area investigated by
normal science are, ofcourse miniscule, with “drastically restricted vision”. But
these are born “from the confidence in a paradigm” and is essential in the development
of science. By focusing on small range of relatively esoteric problems the
paradigm forces scientists to investigate “some part of nature in detail and
depth” that would otherwise be unimaginable. Also, some scientists have great
reputation, not from novelty of their discoveries, but from “the precision, reliability,
and scope of methods that they developed for the redetermination of a previously
known sort of facts”. So, there are three classes of scientific problems: determination
of significant fact, matching of facts with theory, and articulation of theory.
There are extraordinary problems, and their resolution is what makes scientific
enterprise worthwhile. They though emerge only on special occasions prepared by
the advance of normal research. Inevitably, therefore, the overwhelming
majority of the problems undertaken by even the best scientists usually fall
into one of the three categories. Kuhn elaborates on commitments without which
no man or woman is a scientist. The scientist “must be concerned to
understand the world and to extend the precision and scope with which it has
been ordered” which must lead to “scrutinize some aspect of nature in great empirical
detail”, and if the scrutiny displays “pockets of disorder” then it must
challenge to “refinement of observational technique” or to a “further articulation
of theories”. Kuhn importantly brings another aspect of normal science, that of
puzzle solving -a problem characterized by more than one assured
solution. For instance, Japanese space agency’s extremely sophisticated scientific
mission Hayabusa2 discovery of uracil from Ryugu (a near earth asteroid found
within the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter) was an attempt to solve puzzle
of origin of life.
So, what are the temple hopping regrets at Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) posing as? By no stretch
of imagination: a scientist. These are technicians, skilled, but in the context
of posing -mere technicians. Technicians are cog in the system; they work to
make the system function hence useful. Mere technicians are cog for deeper state
aspirations. They are torchbearers of nationalism, partake in crude expressions. They
activate worst and degrade society. Trained in limited field with narrow use
of intellect they are incapable to fathom wider context of the world, and
repercussions. These are failure of education. A technician is unlike a
craftsman or artisan. A craftsman is a human, and is deeply involved in the craft as
expression of human possibility. A technician can easily be replaced by AI working in narrow parameter of predictable repeated outcomes, and
hopefully very soon we are devoid of these dimwit dehumanized technicians that
are exaggerated in primitive societies. Mere technicians at ISRO are trying to replicate
soft landing on moon wherein much more sophisticated feats were achieved more than
50years back by NASA with human landing! They are replicating undervalued
version after five decades. They are not trying to solve any scientific problem
or bigger question; indeed, they are incapable to even conceive -as it is reflected
from their juvenile embarrassing antics. Accepting
anachronistic juvenile premise of religion and its fantastical claims has overwhelming
influence on social psychology and implicit biases that creeps into choices and
mindset. It severely diminishes scope of critical thinking, innovative ideas, egalitarian
value systems and scope for scientific inquiry. It negates human progress and
tags it into primitive premise. So, are these people genuinely herd minded or are
they cleverly planning this ruse to be elevated as herd controllers is the only
question that matters here. We are told that we are in “select club of nations”,
it’s showcasing “technological prowess”. This truly has nothing to do with
science or scientists -who are essentially involved in quieter aspects of scientific
research and a subtler approach with unknown, expound critical thinking and are essential hinge for progressive values. They therefore become aspirational ideals for humanity, important reference for younger generation.
For the largest populated nation
in the planet, with painfully limited contribution to humanity, the mediocrity
is not an accident it is nurtured, and celebrated since they lack any reference
for excellence or compassionate bearing. The effort is to create narration of
blessing, and keep the herd in tight control. From this limited worldview science becomes ritual while scientist are ritualist with sanctum dexterity, and space becomes their natural, indeed entitled, area of expertise. At the most they can do is status
quo increment with specific intention to save money, nothing much. This also
brings in the issue of semantic generalization. The stricter understanding of the
word scientist -conceived with care, may not be applicable in primitive society
-kept in degrading chaos, uncertainty and fate. Hence these must be
undervalued. It is same for art, sports so on mediocre societies undervalues well
defined semantics hence spiral into self-obsession with itself since reality
would devastate. So, whether ISRO lands on moon or not, Indians have already
lost while humanity gawks in wonder at the juvenile antics of philistines in
the semantic garb of scientists. Pity.
**The fact that Indian media is incapable to take responsibility to question the socalled
scientist's disgraceful regressive behavior shows how much they are compromised, and need
herd for survival. While western posers have already put money on compulsive religiophilia for diversity redemption. As degradations are normalized they worry about democracy and patronize for better world by insisting on entitled role as representing common people into paradise and occasion for moral grandstanding.
