Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions became the most widely read book about science in the twentieth century. His terms 'paradigm' and 'scientific revolution' entered everyday speech, but they remain controversial. In the second half of the twentieth century, the new field of cognitive science combined empirical psychology, computer science, and neuroscience. In this book, the theories of concepts developed by cognitive scientists are used to evaluate and extend Kuhn's most influential ideas. Based on case studies of the Copernican revolution, the discovery of nuclear fission, and an elaboration of Kuhn's famous 'ducks and geese' example of concept learning, this volume, first published in 2006, offers accounts of the nature of normal and revolutionary science, the function of anomalies, and the nature of incommensurability.
For one, thank God, or Satan depending on preference, for SEP. I wonder if the science in the book can be considered dated, it doesn't exactly seem like it could, somewhat because unexpectedly there's such little of that present at all; a few extensions of the theory, justified by the Roschian revolution/ development of the graded structure of concepts, iow, people tend to think some instances are better examples of something than others. An idea that fits well with Kuhn's theory of concepts, and personally gives it an actual scientific base. A general note that I'm pretty sure I'm biased towards Theory theory now, other than because it has a confusing name.