It is, I think, particularly in periods of acknowledged crisis that scientists have turned to philosophical analysis as a device for unlocking the riddles of their field. Scientists have not generally needed or wanted to be philosophers.

The historian of science may be tempted to exclaim that when paradigms change, the world itself changes with them.

In science novelty emerges only with difficulty, manifested by resistance, against a background provided by expectation.

As in political revolutions, so in paradigm choice--there is no standard higher than the assent of the relevant community. To discover how scientific revolutions are effected, we shall therefore have to examine not only the impact of nature and of logic, but also the techniques of persuasive argumentation effective within the quite special groups that constitute the community of scientists.

It is, I think, particularly in periods of acknowledged crisis that scientists have turned to philosophical analysis as a device for unlocking the riddles of their field. Scientists have not generally needed or wanted to be philosophers.

Normal science does not aim at novelties of fact or theory and, when successful, finds none.

All significant breakthroughs are break -“withs” old ways of thinking.