Quote Originally Posted by hazetwostep
i'm not understanding on pg 36 where the author talks about a "scientific revolution" not really being about truth... i cannot see how a paradigm that does not have a factual basis could survive...
Well... Greendestinys answer is very good, so i will let his words be mine... i only would like to add that every paradigm has factual basis... they are based upon choosen facts that seems to fit together forming a coherent unity, which gives origin to the paradigm. But, no paradigm can explain all facts, and thats why there is competition between them. I would say that the difference between paradigms lies in which facts they choose as important (and try to explain) and which facts they choose as irrelevant (and try to deny/forget).