Dateline: Home Study

Years ago, many years ago, I studied Thomas S. Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions in a Philosophy of Science class. Imagine my delight when I studied it again, this past week, in a PhD Public Policy class. A lot has changed since I first read Kuhn; I’ve grown older, I have a broader vision, and I can see some connections that I could never have seen twenty-four years ago. For example, I could never have seen a connection between Kuhn, this book, and social sciences.

But now I’m wondering. Does Kuhn help explain some recent changes? Is the DoD transformation a Kuhnian paradigm shift? Do we still need a paradigm shift to handle homeland security, especially Katrina-like events?

Class made it clear, once again, that the profession of Public Policy is searching for a home. We discussed in “Scope” class some two years ago and I’m not sure much has changed. First there is the problem of home: political science or business? Or should the program be housed in some institute? Who knows? Then are those with differences in what the degree should do. The MA program is, for the most part, strictly practitioner oriented, as it probably should be, then there is the more theoretical, research oriented doctoral program. And within that program there are those who are more interested in the “administration” part and those more interested in the “policy” part of Public Policy and Administration (I’m one of the policy people).

I also began thinking of how Kuhn could apply to Thomas P M Barnett’s new rule set. Is his leviathan and sysadmin model a paradigm shift or just another theory? Is the core and non-integrating gap explanation of the world a Kuhnian paradigm shift or simply “normal” science at work? Hard to tell and I’m nit sure we will be able to tell anytime soon. The thing about paradigm shifts is that I don’t think you ever see them coming or see them happening; you can only look back and say “there it was”.