A Comparative Study Of Kuhn's Incommensurability

Incommensurability has become a hot and difficult topic in scientific philosophy research since 30 years ago because the scientific philosophers have their own theory and viewpoints. The paper's author mainly discusses and inspects Kuhn's Incommensurability theory while taking comparative research on scientific philosophers' theories and methods. He demonstrates this not only through discussing it in scientific philosophy domain, but also exploring it in cultural scope, which may be a new inspiration in understanding the incommensurability and cultural relativism. Kuhn's most unique merit of his theory lies in holding the essence of science and he has the historical angle of view. Kuhn's thought roots in historical principle, especially how to appraise the different historical periods and the historical events which displays the rational historical tendency. This has the important influence on Kuhn's Incommensurability. Kuhn's Incommensurability stressed that different Weltanschauungs are decided by different paradigm. The differences between different Weltanschauungs are incommensurability, at this rate there is not a transcendent standard to decide whether accept or reject the theories. When Kuhn prompts us that incommensurability can not translate, we have found the communication spot between incommensurability and cultural. We know the science is one form of the culture which has the characteristics shared with all kinds of culture, thus there were nothing unusual when we found that the science reflects some characteristics of culture. Holding the incommensurable attitudes to the culture brings the academic consequence which is cultural relativism. That is one kind of attitudes treating different cultures (this culture and other culture, culture and subculture).From the background of Kuhn's thought——history principle, to the characteristics ofscientific closeness, and arriving at the incommensurability caused by the differences between different Weltanschauungs as well as the connection between incommensurability and culture, we can easily make a conclusion that the incommensurability is cultural relativism. When the author sets forth the incommensurability of culture, he also demonstrates the rationality exists in cultural relativism. Through the process, he did not forget tell us relativism has its own relativity. Today, the tendency of globalization has profoundly affects our daily life, therefore many questions already unassailably become the questions of all kinds of culture. Accordingly, cultural relativism is also confronted with challenges.