Watson and Crick were not the discoverers of DNA, but rather the first scientists to formulate an accurate description of this molecule's complex, double-helical structure. Moreover, Watson and Crick's work was directly dependent on the research of numerous scientists before them, including Friedrich Miescher, Phoebus Levene, and Erwin Chargaff. Thanks to researchers such as these, we now know a great deal about genetic structure, and we continue to make great strides in understanding the human genome and the importance of DNA to life and health.
In any community of scientists, Kuhn states, there are some individuals who are bolder than most. These scientists, judging that a crisis exists, embark on what Kuhn calls revolutionary science , exploring alternatives to long-held, obvious-seeming assumptions. Occasionally this generates a rival to the established framework of thought. The new candidate paradigm will appear to be accompanied by numerous anomalies, partly because it is still so new and incomplete. The majority of the scientific community will oppose any conceptual change, and, Kuhn emphasizes, so they should. To fulfill its potential, a scientific community needs to contain both individuals who are bold and individuals who are conservative. There are many examples in the history of science in which confidence in the established frame of thought was eventually vindicated. It is almost impossible to predict whether the anomalies in a candidate for a new paradigm will eventually be resolved. Those scientists who possess an exceptional ability to recognize a theory's potential will be the first whose preference is likely to shift in favour of the challenging paradigm. There typically follows a period in which there are adherents of both paradigms. In time, if the challenging paradigm is solidified and unified, it will replace the old paradigm, and a paradigm shift will have occurred.
Supreme Court Cases
Overview & Resources