Theories Definition Essay Example for Free

Theories Definition canvassThis essay discusses theory in a general perspective and some related concepts underpinning it. Kuhn is excessively presented as an example of an alternative theorist.Theories, according to Littlejohn (1992) are abstractions or frameworks for speculating, interpreting, guessing, soul, evaluating, rationalizing, explaining or predicting complexity of phenomena, events, ideas, mathematical or consistent discussions, human relations, and communication through observation and critical thinking. The basic elements of theories are (1) concepts, which are usually categorized, and (2) explanation, which identifies patterns in the relationships among variables and can be casual or practical. Theory, in a traditional perspective, is base on the bring in of knowledge as discovery.It is modeled on the experimental natural eruditions through hypothetico-deductive method that includes cardinal processes (1) developing questions, (2) forming hypotheses, (3) t esting the hypotheses, and (4) formulating theory. This method can be done through variable analysis and it is based on the concepts of hypothesis, operationism, control and manipulation, covering laws, and prediction. Littlejohn cites Robyn Penman in describing alternative double through the following quintuple tenets (1) Action is voluntary.(2) Knowledge is created socially. (3) Theories are historical. (4) Theories affect the reality they are covering. (5) Theories are value laden. The concept of metatheory is utilise in discussing the criticisms of the work of Kuhn because it describes and explains the similarities and differences among theories. The critics of Kuhn have also their own set of ideas or theories in explaining why Kuhns ideas are not accepted. Metatheory issues are grouped into three Major themes epistemology (questions of knowledge), ontology (questions of existence), and axiology (questions of value).doubting Thomas Samuel Kuhn (1992-1996), an American natura l scientist and contemporaneous philosopher who contributed in the evolution of science principles, has contributed much in the narration of and issues on science, culture, and policy in the academic, political, and occupancy fields. Kuhns SSR provides his antithetical views in the philosophy of science in which, like Imre Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend, Kuhn emphasized the office and nature of rationality in the processes of science. Kuhn contends that science operates as a social structure rather than as an impersonal entity advancing toward epistemological commitment (Mackie, 1998, p. 25).He contradicts the concept of logical positivism which states that scientists choose among competing theories in a purely rational fashion (doctrine of Science, 2004). Like William Whewell, Kuhn denies the overly systematic approach to science or the scientific method as the framework for inquiry (Prosise, Miller, Mills, 1996 Mackie, 1998 Roberts, 2000 Nickles, 2003). In SSR, Kuhn presented i ssues on the nature of and the business office of community in scientific discipline. Thus, paradigm depends on the community to which a practitioner belongs (Roberts, 2000).He interprets the history of science based on the development of paradigms, which are not just simple theories but also accepted examples of actual scientific practice that provide models from which spring particular coherent traditions of scientific look into (Kuhn 1970, 4, 10). Paradigms provide new information more or less the world and peoples behavior (Swirski, 1996 Mackie, 1998 Roberts, 2000). Kuhn argues that scientific thought process advances through intellectually violent revolutions (Copulos, 2001). This asserts Kuhns statement the evolution of science is characterized by alternating periods of design and revolutionary scientific activity, with the periods of customary science being far more common (Mackie, 1998, p. 27).For instance, a paradigm shift can be seen in the practice of medicine sinc e alternative medicine has been discovered to be also a promising way of treating diseases but it remains a controversy (Copulos, 2001). It appears that the paradigm cannot be fully developed and evaluated solely in a rational manner based on the verification of facts. This approach impacts on the philosophy of science since it is accepted that a paradigm becomes a prerequisite to understanding why revolutionary science occurs and why periods of normal science persist (Mackie, 1998, p. 28).Kuhn is criticized in his vision of scientific revolution which was seen as maligned for its seemingly inconclusive historical perspective his description of normal science because it implicitly redefined scientific activity and his ambiguous usage of the term paradigm in different ways (Mackie, 1998). Specifically, Israel Scheffler (1967) argued that Kuhn is a radical irrationalist, subjectivist, irrealist, and relativist because he denies that science provides the basis for objective truth abou t reality at the perceptual-phenomenal level.Nickles (2003) adds that Kuhn as a principal source of postmodern relativism and of culture-theoretical treatments of science generallyOther critics view Kuhn as intellectually conservative in important ways. ..Kuhn differed rather little from the logical positivists on crucial issues, especially assumptions about language and meaning. Kuhns work is also politically conservative and elitist, so much so that, owing to its capital influence, it has destroyed any attempt to develop a more democratic science policy for the predictable future (p. 3). Despite the criticisms he received, Kuhn was able to defend his theories by defining his terms more carefully.His secondly fluctuation of SSR (1970) made amendments and used disciplinary matrix to substitute for paradigm (Mackie, 1998). In the third edition of SSR, Kuhn denied the accusation of relativism and he further clarified his views to avoid misinterpretation (Dyson, 1999). The changes made by Kuhn in SSR shows development from ambiguity to a clearer explanation. As Littlejohn (1992) notes, theories are constantly evolving and they need to be mastered.As an alternative-paradigm theorist, Kuhn did the process of fine-tuning interpretative framework for understanding the flow of events (p. 25). Although Kuhn was criticized for his theories in his SSR, it is undeniable that his theories played significant role in describing, although not accurately, the development of science principles. Kuhns theory focused on rational assessment of ideas and it suits disciplines outside normal science because it is irrelevant to philosophy of science but is significant in the analysis of human behavior.ReferencesPhilosophy of Science. (2004). The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th edition. New York Columbia University Press.Dyson, F. (1999). The Sun, the Genome, and the Internet Tools of Scientific Revolutions. Oxford University Press, Inc..Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2d ed. wampum University of Chicago Press.Littlejohn, S. (1992). Chapter 2 Theory in the process of inquiry, Theories of Human Communication. Wadsworth Publishing Co, 25.Mackie, C. D. (1998). Canonizing Economic Theory How Theories and Ideas are Selected in Economics. Armonk, NY M. E. Sharpe.Milton R. Copulos, (November 12, 2001). A Shift in Thinking about Medicine. Insight on the News 17(42), 46.Nickles, T. (ed.) (2003). Thomas Kuhn. Cambridge, England Cambridge University Press.Prosise, T. O., Miller, Greg R., Mills, Jordan P. (1996). Argument Fields as Arenas of Discursive Struggle Argument Fields and Pierre Bourdieus Theory of mixer Practice. Argumentation and Advocacy 32(3), 111+.Roberts, L. J. (2000). Thomas Kuhns the Structure of Scientific Revolutions. ETC. A Review of General Semantics, 57(1), 59.Swirski, P. (1996). bouncing Theory in the Third Pentagon A Study in Strategy and Rationality. Criticism 38(2), 303+.