eterevsky

eterevsky t1_j7oh98q wrote

When I read Kuhn, I couldn't help but feel like his theory of scientific progress consists mostly of backsplaining. He examines only a handful of scientific revolutions and with so few of them it is of course possible to describe them in any way he liked.

Did somebody manage to extract any verifiable predictions from Kuhn's work? How did they fair in the time that passes since the publishing of his book? Could his theory for example explain Moore's Law?

0