petebooth[iaac]

Thomas Kuhn, 1962
Chicago University Press.

Hailed as one of the most important books published since the Second World War, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions provides an analysis of the history of science and discovery. Kuhn argues that science is not a steady, cumulative acquisition of knowledge over time. Instead, he suggests that science consists of steady research, evolving into new discovery through intellectual revolutions.

Kuhn is also responsible for popularizing the term paradigm. He describes a paradigm essentially as a set of beliefs shared by scientists. A set of principals about how problems are to be understood and studied. Paradigms are essential for scientific investigation, they guide research efforts of scientific communities. Fundamental to Khun’s argument is that the typical development pattern of modern science is the successive transition from one paradigm to another through the process of revolution.

Contrary to public perception, Kuhn also maintained that typical scientists are not objective and independent thinkers. Rather, they are intrinsically conservative individuals who accept what they have been taught and apply this mind set to solving the problems that their theories dictate. In essence, they are puzzle-solvers who aim discover what they already know in advance.

“The man who is striving to solve a problem defined by existing knowledge and technique is not just looking around. He knows what he wants to achieve, and he designs his instruments and directs his thoughts accordingly.”

The primary task of scientists is to bring the accepted theory and fact into closer alignment. As a consequence, scientists tend to ignore findings that may threaten the existing paradigm and conception of a new and competing paradigm. For example, the notion that the sun revolved around the earth was popularized by Ptolemy, a view that was defended for centuries even in the face of conflicting evidence.

Kuhn suggests that a scientific revolution is a non-cumulative developmental cycle in which an older paradigm is replaced in whole or in part by an incompatible new one. The new paradigm can not be built on the preceding one, rather it can only supplement it.

“the normal-scientific tradition that emerges from a scientific revolution is not only incompatible but actually incommensurable with that which has gone before.”

Many of the arguments and examples put forward within The Structure of Scientific Revolutions have a much broader implication in areas other than scientific research and discovery. Emergent Architectural Culture has an intrinsic connection with the notions put forward.

The majority of projects within architecture, weather research or physical, are based around the same principals. Buildings need a door to each room, natural ventilation is highly desirable and it is considered a bonus if it is pointing in the correct direction to maximize solar gain and control. These are merely variables of a standard formula to create a building. There is often experimentation in the facades of buildings, but these are usually wrapping a ‘standard’ interior.

If architects continue to design buildings based upon traditional notions of what a building are, then the advancement of architecture will stumble slowly forward for a foreseeable future.

With the introduction of emerging digital techniques into architecture practice, some architects have begun to push the boundaries of common practice, hence beginning to challenge the commonly accepted paradigm of architecture.

The manner in which this is happening is not to far removed from process that Kuhn suggests. Disparate architectural practices, researchers and academics are studying the field of emergent architecture from slightly different perspectives. Perspectives built upon their experience, interests and influences. These contrasting approaches add to the collective knowledge of a field of architectural research. With time this knowledge will build, strengthening its challenge against the commonly accepted paradigm of architectural tradition. At this point, the new emergent architectural paradigm will overthrow existing pre-conceptions, providing a pathway for the avant-garde.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.