Alex WellersteinVerified account

I did too many, many years ago. I now dismiss it as one of the great errors in historiography and philosophy of science

I still adore it. First HPS book I read. Reason I took up the field.

It's still fundamentally and seriously wrong

Normal science as puzzle solving still seems pretty solid. I always thought that was the smartest bit. And the most novel.

Agree on normal science, his best contribution, but paradigms are a myth and a dangerous one

...on what constitutes a question and what's a valid answer is very smart.

Throughout the history of science there was far, far less collective agreement than is popularly believed

And if your claim is right, Kuhn is even more necessary. How is it we end up agreeing on what we agree on? Structure gave an answer.