The the problems that anenvironment they created.?With

The change of paradigm is named as revolution because it has similarities with politicalrevolution.?A scientific revolution is a non-cumulative development plot, in which an olderparadigm is wholly or partly replaced by incompatible new ones. The scientificrevolution that led to paradigm change was similar to the political revolution. Thepolitical revolution began with the growing awareness of the members of society,and the existing institutions had ceased to cope with the problems that anenvironment they created.?With the deepening of the crisis, individuals under the new institutional framework tocommit to the specific recommendations of the reconstruction of society. Competitivecamp and party form. A camp seeks to defend the old institutional constellation. One ormore camps to try to formulate a new political order. In the case of polarization, thepolitical recovery of the parties to the revolutionary conflict has finally taken the meansof large-scale persuasion.?The difference in the paradigm can not be reconciled. When the paradigm entersthe debate on basic questions and paradigm choices, each group uses its ownparadigm to debate the defense which results in the inability to share a worldfilled with discourse .?A new paradigm of success allows different predictions from predictions derivedfrom their predecessors. If the two are logically compatible, this difference can notoccur. In the process of being absorbed, the second must replace the first one.? The reason of revolution is that paradigms can not achieve a negotiation.12.The Resolution of Revolutions.?The scientific revolution takes place after a paradigm replaces another paradigm, after aperiod of paradigm testing, which occurs only after a failure to solve a noteworthy problemthat causes a crisis. This process is similar to the natural choice: a theory in a particularhistorical situation to become the most practical choice of a kind.?At the beginning, a new paradigm candidate may have no supporters. If supporters have theability, they will improve the paradigm, explore their possibilities, and show communitiesthat are community-based. In order to win the example of victory, the number and strengthof its favorable convincing arguments will increase.?As scientists changes , exploration increases. The number of experiments, instruments,articles and books based on paradigm will be multiplied. More scientists believe that theresults of the new view will reach a new normal scientific practice model until only a fewolder people can continue to exist. We can not say that they are wrong. Perhaps the scientists continue to resist after the whole career has been converted, and in fact is no longer ascientist.?Scientists who initially adhere to the paradigm often as Kuhn said, there are a lot offaith elements. But as the evidence gradually increases, then there will be more andmore people to accept it.13. Progress Through Revolutions.?Even if we think that a field has not made progress, the revolution has triumphed, soscience has made progress. But why is progress going to be a distinguishing feature ofscience? This is Kuhn’s progress. In the case of?Kuhn divides it into two problems to solve: 1. Why does the same science-like careeradvance? (There are three reasons: no competitive school; scientists isolated; scientificeducation factors) 2. why progress is accompanied by the revolution?? The term science is reserved as the fields that do progress in obvious ways.?The reason why science is a science,because it achieves progress in a certain field, orsimply because it can improve itself??The progress in normal scientific is because the firm has a certain salient feature, maturescientific members from a single paradigm or a closely related combination of work. Fewdifferent scientific communities have investigated the same problem. The result of creativework is progress.?Even if we think that a field does not have progress, this does not mean that the individualschools or disciplines in the field will not either. Those who think that philosophy is notimproving emphasizes that the Aristotelian school still exists,instead of Aristotelianism hasnot progressed.?Only during normal science, progress seems obvious and assurances. To a certain extent,this progress is in the eyes of the spectator. There is no competing paradigm, questioningeach other’s goals and standards, making the progress of the normal scientific communityeasier to see. Accepting paradigm can make the community no longer need to re-examineits first principles and basic assumptions. Community members can focus on the most subtleand deepest of the phenomenon that focuses on it. Unlike other disciplines, scientists donot need to choose a problem because they urgently need a solution, regardless of the toolsavailable to solve the problem.