David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Social Studies of Science 33:137-49 (2003)
It has often been remarked that science is a young man's game. Thomas Kuhn, for example, claims that revolutionary changes in science are almost always initiated by either young scientists or those new to a field. I subject Kuhn's hypothesis to testing. I examine 24 revolutionary scientific figures mentioned in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions to determine if young scientists are more likely to make revolutionary discoveries than older scientists. My analysis suggests that middle-aged scientists are responsible for initiating more scientific revolutions than young scientists, given the proportion of each group in the total population of scientists. I argue that the popular myth about the correlation between youth and scientific discovery fails to take into account the proportion of young scientists in the population of scientists.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
John S. Wilkins (2008). The Adaptive Landscape of Science. Biology and Philosophy 23 (5):659-671.
K. Brad Wray (2007). The Cognition Dimension of Theory Change in Kuhn's Philosophy of Science. [REVIEW] Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 38 (3):610-613.
Similar books and articles
Jean Stangl (1989). The Tools of Science: Ideas and Activities for Guiding Young Scientists. Tab Books.
Paul Hoyningen-Huene (1993). Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn's Philosophy of Science. University of Chicago Press.
Daniela M. Bailer-Jones (2002). Scientists' Thoughts on Scientific Models. Perspectives on Science 10 (3):275-301.
John T. Edsall (1995). On the Hazards of Whistleblowers and on Some Problems of Young Biomedical Scientists in Our Time. Science and Engineering Ethics 1 (4):329-340.
David L. Hull (1998). Studying the Study of Science Scientifically. Perspectives on Science 6 (3):209-231.
Mercy Kamara (2009). The Typology of the Game That American, British, and Danish Crop and Plant Scientists Play. Minerva 47 (4):441-463.
Agnieszka Lekka-Kowalik (2010). Why Science Cannot Be Value-Free. Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (1):33-41.
Hanne Andersen (2006). The Cognitive Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Cambridge University Press.
Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (eds.) (1970). Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-08-21
Total downloads1 ( #747,055 of 1,790,225 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #427,637 of 1,790,225 )
How can I increase my downloads?