-Defined as a “common theory” that has changed, a “metamorphosis”, examples include- foot binding in china, the earth is “flat”, Darwin’s theory of evolution
Every so often, scientific discoveries “shift” paradigms. A group of scientists or perhaps one scientist works together to embark on a discovery that does not fit within the assumptions of normal science, these findings are then tested. If the scientific community accepts this change and “overrule” in science, there will be a paradigm shift. There are however many limitations to paradigm shifts, many young scientists intend to get their career started by proposing risky theories, are the proposed theories worth investigating? is there really such thing as a scientific truth?
As humans, we go insane if don’t understand something, hence science allows us to have trust in the world. We have faith in scientists to do their job, and to trust that the theory they have discovered is correct. However, where do scientists get their knowledge from? and what evidence is there to support the theory of discoveries? An example of a paradigm shift is the belief that the earth was flat. Many centuries ago, humans believed that the earth was flat, this was all due to the limitations sense perception. This belief continued until greek astronomers imposed a theory that the earth was indeed round, and you could not “fall off the earth”. This discovery led to many controversies during the time. There are many limitations of discovery, we have to include uncertainties of the equipment, as well as imperfect information. All of these limitations are possible when embarking on discovery as well as carrying out experiments. There are many chances that what we believe now is actually false, and that in the near future, many paradigm shifts will occur by our generation of scientists. So, is there really such thing as a “scientific truth”? or do these theories only exist to stop us humans from turning mad?