Kuhn, in Metaphors and Through [1993], claims:

“Metaphors play an essential role in establishing links between scientific language and the world. Those links are not, however, given once and for all. Theory change, in particular, is accompanied by a change in some of the relevant metaphors and in the corresponding parts of the network of similarities through which terms attach to nature.”

Given that exemplars correspond to images of something concrete, and let scientists see similarities between similar problems, can examplars be seen as metaphors as well?

Which is the main sense of "metaphor in science" in Kuhn's philosophy?

  • 1
    Is the reference Metaphors and Through correct? – Frank Hubeny Sep 25 '18 at 4:05
  • 2
    @FrankHubeny - NO. It is Metaphor in Science, published into Andrew Ortony (editor), Metaphor and Thought (Cambridge UP, 1993) and reprinted as Ch.8 of Thomas Kuhn, The Road since Structure : Philosophical Essays 1970-1993 (The University of Chicago Press, 2000). – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Sep 25 '18 at 6:27
  • 1
    See Metaphor for the context of Kuhn's paper : Max Balck's theory of the way metaphor works. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Sep 25 '18 at 9:54
  • Not clear... exemplars in Kuhn's SSR are books: Ptolemy's Almagest, Lavoisier's Traité élémentaire de chimie, and Newton's Principia Mathematica and Opticks. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Sep 25 '18 at 10:10
  • this almost reads like an apologia of Jordan Peterson – amphibient Sep 26 '18 at 18:15

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.