Anomaly And The Emergence Of Scientific Discoveries Summary

The author of “Anomaly and the Emergence of Scientific Discoveries” discusses the difficulty that arises when trying to acknowledge an idea as a discovery. The questions raised are: when something is discovered, who made the discovery, is there record of who/when a discovery was made, and when is an idea actually a discovery. Kuhn advances the idea of a discovery by connecting it to the creation of a scientific revolution. He discusses that “a discovery begins with the awareness of anomaly” (Kuhn, p.3). Kuhn’s take on discovery differs from the author of “Anomaly and the Emergence of Scientific Discoveries” because he gives credit to the researchers who precisely know what to expect from an experiment which allows them to recognize an anomaly (Kuhn, p.3). In “Anomaly and the Emergence of Scientific Discoveries “, the author mentions that in order for something to be considered a discovery the discover has to be able to explain it i.e “both observation and conceptualization, fact and …show more content…
Similarly, Zimmer believes that scientists have to work together to create a set of steps for experiments so that other scientists can replicated the experiments; thus, allowing scientists to create a consensus (Zimmer, p.3). Then, this relates to Johnson’s article where he states that “replication…is the gold standard of science” (Johnson, p.3). Porter’s argument on the way to construct objectivity of science is weak. He discusses that what makes science unbiased is that scientists in the same field reach an agreement that an idea is valid. However, he doesn’t mention what constitutes a valid idea. Whereas, the author of “Anomaly and the Emergence of Scientific Discoveries” thoroughly discusses that in order for a discovery to be considered by scientists it must first be conceptualized and thoroughly be explained by the