how can you tell the flat earth is one of the paradigm shift in history science​

Explanation:

But the notion of paradigms that shape our world-view has been expanded beyond science to everyday life. Kuhn�s original focus was on the creation, testing, and replacement of major scientific theories with better theories � closer approximations to the observable data. Today, the term has been popularized to refer to things as simple as beliefs, attitudes and tastes. In this sense, a paradigm is analogous to a set of glasses one puts on. If the lenses are yellow, we see the world as yellow. After a while, we forget we have decided to look at the world through yellow lenses � we simply believe that the world is yellow. In the discussion that follows I will refer sometimes to the scientific meaning of paradigms (major world-views of science) and sometimes to the popular one (a particular approach to a particular issue).

Paradigms as Lenses

Once a paradigm (or model) is established or accepted, an interesting thing happens � it shapes how we interpret facts. Take someone who believes in a paradigm that holds that many UFO sightings are extra-terrestrial beings visiting the planet Earth. How do they interpret new evidence? An exhaustive government study of existing evidence and a report dismissing the extraterrestrial claims would probably be taken as more evidence for a cover-up. Ambiguous evidence is often be interpreted as favoring the theory.

Or listen to a talk show where the host is politically quite liberal or quite conservative. Virtually every event that occurs in the world is interpreted through a liberal or conservative lens. Typically new data points (facts) that appear to contradict the host�s paradigm are twisted to fit the existing (preferred) model. If you�re conservative you can see this in liberal thinking, and if you�re liberal you can see this in conservative thinking. But it�s hard to take off our own lenses and see the world �as it really is.� I put that in quotes because as soon as we enter the world of language and ideas and human communication, we must take on some paradigm, some perspective. And whether we're looking at a house, a mountain, or an issue, the perspective we take frames what we see.

Since all knowledge is created in human minds, and from some specific perspective, postmodernists argue that no one can legitimately claim to see the world as it really is. We each have our own eyes and ears, and our own mind and history of previous experiences - and so the world occurs differently to each of us.

This is where the scientific method comes in � it is designed to keep researchers from injecting their personal views into their data collection, data analysis, and conclusions. Researchers (are supposed to) rely on the scientific method to minimize bias and mistakes. While the scientific method provides a rigorous structure to keep scientists from their own biases, since they are human beings they are subject to the tendency to make sense of the world, find patterns, and emerge with a structure of beliefs that holds together.

But Kuhn argued that the scientist�s paradigm itself becomes a trap. He argued that scientists do a reasonable job of assessing data when considering alternative paradigms and theories. But once a scientist takes on a particular paradigm or theory, they see data that supports this view quite well, but they overlook contradicting

data quite easily.

�Philosophers of science have repeatedly demonstrated that more than one theoretical construction can always be placed upon a given collection of data. History of science indicates that, particularly in the early developmental stages of a new paradigm, it is not even very difficult to invent such alternates. But that invention of alternates is just what scientists seldom undertake except during the pre-paradigm stage of their science's development and at very special occasions during its subsequent evolution. So long as the tools a paradigm supplies continue to prove capable of solving the problems it defines, science moves fastest and penetrates most deeply through confident employment of those tools. The reason is clear. As in manufacture so in science - retooling is an extravagance to be reserved for the occasion that demands it. The significance of crises is the indication they provide that an occasion for retooling has arrived.� - Thomas S. Kuhn in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (p. 76)

Answer:

Paradigms in Science

Paradigms provide models upon which "particular coherent traditions of scientific research" can be based. For example, the scientific method itself is a paradigm (though which "science" views the world: a traditional Western, empirical, quantitative approach to studying things). Another example of a paradigm is the theory of evolution. Evolution is the underlying structure which best fits the observable evidence in fields as diverse as biology (the evolution of species), geology (the evolution of the earth), and cosmology (the evolution of the stars, the galaxies, and the universe). A third example is Newtonian mechanics. This was the basic paradigm for physics until Einstein came a long and demonstrated that relativity was a better fit to the available facts � a better approximation to the real world. It�s not that mechanics was �false� and relativity �true.� Newtonian mechanics fit most of the available data found in the everyday existence of human beings, but broke down at extremes of mass and speed. But as a model, it was � and is � still very useful when dealing with the engineering, construction, and use of the technology and artifacts that people use in everyday life. Newtonian mechanics has been replaced as the dominant paradigm in physics, but it is not �false,� because it never was �true.� It is simply a model of how things work, and is either useful for one�s purpose or it is not useful.

Like theories, paradigms are "useful fictions." Like theories, they provide a framework upon which we can hang many or most of the observable facts (data) and better see the relationships among those facts. Paradigms are often theories that help define entire areas of study ("disciplines").

But the notion of paradigms that shape our world-view has been expanded beyond science to everyday life. Kuhn�s original focus was on the creation, testing, and replacement of major scientific theories with better theories � closer approximations to the observable data. Today, the term has been popularized to refer to things as simple as beliefs, attitudes and tastes. In this sense, a paradigm is analogous to a set of glasses one puts on. If the lenses are yellow, we see the world as yellow. After a while, we forget we have decided to look at the world through yellow lenses � we simply believe that the world is yellow. In the discussion that follows I will refer sometimes to the scientific meaning of paradigms (major world-views of science) and sometimes to the popular one (a particular approach to a particular issue).

Paradigms as Lenses

Once a paradigm (or model) is established or accepted, an interesting thing happens � it shapes how we interpret facts. Take someone who believes in a paradigm that holds that many UFO sightings are extra-terrestrial beings visiting the planet Earth. How do they interpret new evidence? An exhaustive government study of existing evidence and a report dismissing the extraterrestrial claims would probably be taken as more evidence for a cover-up. Ambiguous evidence is often be interpreted as favoring the theory.

Paradigm Shifts

A paradigm shift occurs when there is a �crisis� in a particular field. The crisis is always related to the fact that the old paradigm can no longer account for enough of the existing evidence to be believed by a majority of people. At the same time, there is typically strong enough evidence to indicate that a relatively new paradigm is a better structure through which to view the available evidence. At first, such new approaches are often rejected, even ridiculed. Copernicus and Galileo both had better paradigms, but they both suffered for leading the scientific revolution � for being too far ahead of their times.

It takes time, but eventually the old view is replaced by the new view, because it is a better approximation to reality (it fits better with the available evidence). For example, Newtonian mechanics was the primary paradigm in physics until the 20th Century when Einstein's theory of relativity was demonstrated to be a better approximation of the physics of the universe.

Explanation:

Hope it Helps