|
|
Posted by Mallika Rajartnam on July 19, 19104 at 13:56:58:
In Reply to: Re: Nietzsche a precursor to Kuhn. posted by lance on July 27, 19100 at 18:15:38:
: : What did Thomas Kuhn describe in his functional ysis of scientific revolutions that was not already articulated in Nietzsches critique of Wissenschaft throughout his work? Is the scientific discourse in competing paradigms and the continuation ad infinitum that Kuhn posits any different than Nietzsches concepts of perspectivism,interpretation and the human-all-too-human elements in any cultural endeavor? Is the reason Kuhn conueously never sites Nietzsche anywhere in his structural and descriptive philosophy of science because Nietzsches teleos was at worst non-rational and at best a constant flux of power relationships that could be dynamically interpreted by different paradigms indefinitely? Was Kuhn afraid of the slippery slope to a non-positable single comprehensive paradigm that his epistomology could not salvage. Kuhn agrees with Nietzsche that various interpretations can exist into perptuity but does not jettison the belief in a rational universe and sciences nor mans belief that mind could comprehend it with scientific method. This shared belief allows him to make similiar claims about the relativity of paradigms as Nietzsche does about interpretation of facts. The major difference is Kuhn believes that that the universe can be ultimately rationally determinable and Nietzshce views it as one more belief no different than god and is therby excluded for non-compliance by the scientist. Even and specifically the god fearing scientist.