Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Anonymous Coward's avatar

> The tidy, linear model of scientific progress—professors thinking deep thoughts in ivory towers, then handing blueprints to engineers—is indefensible.

True, but this isn’t news; Thomas Kuhn wrote “The Structure of scientific revolutions” in the 1960s, arguing that periods of “normal science”, when observations are used mostly to confirm existing models, are interrupted by periods of “revolutionary science”, when observations are used to show that a model is insufficient or inaccurate. He suggests this will eventually lead to a revolution, or “paradigm shift”, as when the Copernican model of the solar system replaced the Ptolemaic model. There are many examples related to both science (Einstein and relativity) and engineering (the Wright brothers and aerodynamics).

Expand full comment
Bouke van der Bijl's avatar

Thanks for linking to my blog! I couldn't for the life of me get cursor to write the rootless ping, it kept producing nonsense. Maybe I need to give Amp a try 😉

Expand full comment

No posts

Ready for more?