Socratic+Discussion+on+Paradigm+Shifts+in+the+Natural+Sciences

Back to Home>Back to Evidence and Certainty

To clarify our understanding on the role of evidence in the Natural Sciences, we are going to focus on the question:
 * Instructions:**

//What does it take to change a paradigm in the Natural Sciences?//
Consider the claims of Kuhn, that normal science (everyday science) works to stifle new paradigms by calling claims that do not fit anomalies? Do you agree? How easy is it to shift how we understand and explain the natural world? Does it require one counter example (i.e. a bowling ball that levitates despite the force of gravity) or do you need to build a consensus amongst a majority of the global population or do you need to simply convince the experts in the field?

To prepare for the discussion you should review your notes from the double lesson to construct a page of talking points that you would like to interject into this discussion. Your points should be reinforced with specific examples and references to where you found your information. You will be assessed on the content of your ideas, the strength of your arguments and you adherence to the format and procedures of the Socratic Discussion. Your preparation sheet will be collected at the end of the lesson, so you must print it before coming to class.