In 1976, Kuhn published a book called “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” in which he explained why science progresses in small steps. His book became very famous and controversial because he said that science does not follow strict rules to prove its validity. Instead, it follows a path of trial and error. He also wrote about how the scientific method is more like a conversation between generations and not just a method. Science is not always consistent with itself. While scientists may agree on many things, there will always be disagreements and controversies around certain ideas. Scientists will argue against each other and try to convince others that what they are saying is right. It is how scientific debate works.
Feyerabend – Kuhn’s friend – argued that scientific progress isn’t achieved by following strict rules. He also said that new ideas should be accepted even if they contradict previous ones. Consistency with old ideas doesn’t help science advance. Feyerabend suggested that we shouldn’t follow any methodological rules. This makes sense because no one rule works equally well in every case. Scientists don’t need to agree on what the rules are. Science progresses anyway.
