Product Description

Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper, a young historian and an old philosopher, met just once to discuss the nature of science. Yet, for the last half-century Kuhn’s triumph has dominated public discussions on the topic.

But could the million copies sold of Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions betray an error in collective judgement? Steve Fuller says yes: not only have we judged wrongly, but we have also radically misunderstood the parties in the process.

The future of science itself depends on understanding the philosophical, political and even religious basis of what separated Kuhn and Popper. Drawing on his own original examination of the Kuhn archives at MIT, Fuller provides an exhilarating tour of a battle that goes to heart of what we think science is. A provocative account of a landmark confrontation in which ‘the wrong guy’ won.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #42567 in Books
• Published on: 2006-03-02
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 240 pages

Financial Times
‘So much iconoclastic intellectual energy courses through Steve Fuller … this is a feisty and rich book, and always stimulating.’

Jenny Uglow
'This is the very book I’ve been needing to read for ages, to get things straight in my mind!’

TLS
'Nuanced and informed analysis’

Customer Reviews

A book that challenges your preconceptions
The TLS had a review of this book a couple of weeks ago and managed to do the book justice. Basically Popperians will love the book at two levels. Not only does it defend Popper against Kuhn, but it also falsifies one’s – or at least my! -- preconception of what the Kuhn-Popper debate was really about.

Make no mistake about it. ‘Kuhn vs Popper’ is not for the intellectually faint-hearted but its message is pretty clear, if not entirely welcomed by people who have come to believe that Kuhn is the last word on the nature of science. In any case, as Fuller points out, this debate really had very little influence on practicing scientists – but it influenced a lot of people who take science seriously as some basis for authority in society. What Fuller most regrets about Kuhn’s victory is that it has managed to allow a pretty conservative, heads-down approach to science to pass itself off as radical, just because Kuhn used a lot of radical-sounding words like ‘revolution’.

The most interesting part of this book is the way Fuller gets you to think about the politics both in and around science as it’s done today. He argues that BOTH Kuhn and Popper would condemn the sort of money-hungry, status-seeking, power-grabbing activities all too frequently associated with science today. However, Popper was more openly critical of these tendencies, whereas Kuhn hid behind trendy but vague language that still manages to seduce some people.

Good introduction
I recently considered starting an MSc in Philosophy of Science and decided to read something simple to gain some idea about the subject. I chose this book because the compulsory module for this MSc involves reading a lot about Kuhn. I did have some of Kuhn's books, but decided on something much simpler that I could easily read in a week.

The book is hard-going in places because for the layman, there are many unfamiliar terms used. Fortunately there is a glossary towards the end of the book which helps.

This book gave me an insight into the work of Kuhn and convinced me that the philosophy of Science being discussed should be called Sociology of Science. This was enough to persuade me that I didn't really want to put the time, money and effort into studying for the stated MSc.

It is fitting that Steve Fuller is a sociologist, as much of the content is really about the sociology of Science.

Great book! Read before judging it
I'm writing this review not because the book needs more sales, since this may be the bestselling of Fuller's books. But I'm amazed at the cheek of the reviewers here. I don't think they bothered to read the book at all, certainly not to the end. The book is divided into short chapters that look at various senses in which Kuhn and Popper may be seen as having disagreed with each other. The paperback edition contains a glossary that is not included in the hardback.

Like it or not, not much seems to have happened when these two guys encountered each other. The action really did occur offstage -- in the various spins that partisans gave to what KUhn and Popper stood for. Kuhn's spin doctors won the PR war, though largely without Kuhn's help. Kuhn comes across in this book as cowardly, Popper as awkward but basically right. There's lots to think about here in terms of what intellectual responsibility means once your work has a much more public impact than you intended.

Also, I think unbiased readers will find it interesting the common roots of scientific paradigms/revolutions with religious dogma/heresy. No doubt those who see science and religion as polar opposites won't get the point. But others will. Buy it and judge for yourself.