Buy new:
$22.16$22.16
$3.99
delivery:
July 13 - 19
Ships from: Revolver Market Sold by: Revolver Market
Buy used: $7.64
Other Sellers on Amazon
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions 3rd Edition
There is a newer edition of this item:
Purchase options and add-ons
- ISBN-100226458083
- ISBN-13978-0226458083
- Edition3rd
- PublisherUniversity of Chicago Press
- Publication dateDecember 15, 1996
- LanguageEnglish
- Dimensions5.25 x 0.75 x 8 inches
- Print length212 pages
Frequently bought together

What do customers buy after viewing this item?
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com Review
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is indeed a paradigmatic work in the history of science. Kuhn's use of terms such as "paradigm shift" and "normal science," his ideas of how scientists move from disdain through doubt to acceptance of a new theory, his stress on social and psychological factors in science--all have had profound effects on historians, scientists, philosophers, critics, writers, business gurus, and even the cartoonist in the street.
Some scientists (such as Steven Weinberg and Ernst Mayr) are profoundly irritated by Kuhn, especially by the doubts he casts--or the way his work has been used to cast doubt--on the idea of scientific progress. Yet it has been said that the acceptance of plate tectonics in the 1960s, for instance, was sped by geologists' reluctance to be on the downside of a paradigm shift. Even Weinberg has said that "Structure has had a wider influence than any other book on the history of science." As one of Kuhn's obituaries noted, "We all live in a post-Kuhnian age." --Mary Ellen Curtin
Review
About the Author
Product details
- Publisher : University of Chicago Press; 3rd edition (December 15, 1996)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 212 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0226458083
- ISBN-13 : 978-0226458083
- Item Weight : 8.8 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.25 x 0.75 x 8 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #338,039 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #63 in Linear Algebra (Books)
- #94 in Medical History & Records (Books)
- #1,075 in History & Philosophy of Science (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996)was professor emeritus of philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His many books include The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and Black-Body Theory and the Quantum Discontinuity, 1894-1912, both published by the University of Chicago Press.
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Revolutionary ideas and theories gain faster acceptance if the new paradigm can quickly lead to economical and social benefits. I believe this is why the story of ulcers so quickly received the recognition of Nobel Prize in Medicine. If the idea leads to more effective treatment, who could hold up its consequences? Even the opponent would embrace it immediately because he would not want to suffer from ulcers.
The problem is that sometime the benefit of making a paradigm shift is not immediately obvious. The defendant of the old paradigm simply resists changes because the habit to tirelessly improve the old paradigm is hard to change.
It is difficult for us to appreciate the point of view expressed in Kuhn's book unless we are familiar with the process of a scientific revolution. I can verify based on my experiences, i.e., on the reactions to our work that Kuhn is "right on the money". Let me quote three remarks by the members of the community, first on my published scientific article, second on a rejected manuscript, and the third on my declined proposal to the National Science Foundation:
"To say that the conclusions drawn by the submitted article are controversial is an understatement of Herculean proportion....While scientific advancement often requires the disproving of established thought, the authors of this work attempt to do so without sufficient proof. The material responses described in this article could be ascribed to other physical processes, including those that adhere to the traditional school of thought...The urgency to abandon conventional wisdom without sound basis is disturbing."
"The Comment by xxx (two of whom are xxx Medalists) makes a very strong case for dismissing the main results of xxx (the present reviewer). Unfortunately, the Reply makes ZERO valid counterpoints and consequently should not be published. If xxx (the present reviewer) want to admit their mistakes and explain how they fell into the trap of publishing erroneous results, this might be useful so that others do not make similar mistakes in the future."
"Overall, the PI needs to calm down considerably. In this proposal and his recent papers, the PI tries valiantly to sell his work as the single most important breakthrough in the history of science! In fact, both the proposed and recent work is reasonable, but the overselling done by the PI irritates people."
I hope that people like Mr. Peter Hobson would in the future interview some people involved in scientific revolutions before making comments that could be misleading.
It is very sad that the phenomena described by Thomas Kuhn are real. I have learned to be patient and more tolerant after reading the book.
I am also very intrigued by his definition of Science as well as his statements regarding textbooks that present science as absolute truth without offering any historical perspective and describing where it comes from and who is chiefly responsible for creating it. I hope to write about these issues at another time.
This book is a challenge to read for a casual scientist, but does follow a pattern. In particular, there seems to be "a point" on each page, with the reminder of the narrative being a digression providing anecdotal evidence of scientific breakthrough that illustrates his "point." There are several strong outlines available on the internet that can facilitate the deciphering of the pattern. I think you would have to be a pretty hardcore science junkie on par of a jeopardy champion to get the full enjoyment of reading each digression. However, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is truly a benchmark of how we view science (agree or disagree) and is required reading for any serious scholar.
The Kuhnian notion of "normal science" consists of the creation of a dominant paradigm which subsequently governs all inquiry. Hegemony is created where ongoing research either fits within the "knowledge base" or the researcher may be ostracized. In this manner, scientific revolutions occur in a linear fashion, where one paradigm is "discovered," entrenched, then de-constructed, subsequently making room for the next paradigm.
Obviously, in the post-modern age, we may no longer think of scientific revolutions as occurring as a succession of periods of normal science (theoretical monism). Recent researchers such as a theoretical pluralism approach where science should be comprised of competing research paradigms. In other words, the more competition, the better the progress. What makes the third edition so interesting is the epilogue written recently (1996). The original edition as published in 1962, so the epilogue is his opportunity to respond to what critics have said about his work over the past 30 years.
Top reviews from other countries
The reason for my three stars, is that Kuhn does not fully account for what has happened in the last forty years. The arrival of political influence on science, through state sponsored scientific programmes, has made a mockery of a principled approach to science. This is evident in the over reliance on scientific models that vary significantly from actual data, the controversy over the scientific basis of ‘man-made climate change’ is one such example.
Kuhn’s arguments led to a significant attack on the nature of science by political opportunists. These same opportunists then wanted to redefine science and use it to their own advantage. Once weakened by Kuhn’s philosophical assault, science became vulnerable to those with political motivation, who now use it as a weapon. It is common to hear phrases such as ‘scientists believe’ or ‘scientifically proven’ by lay people wishing to come across as authority figures.
Both human psychology and politics have affected the once truthful goals of science and Kuhn certainly got one of these right.












