Incommensurability
 |
This article is orphaned. Few or no other articles link to it. (May 2009) |
 |
The English used in this article may not be easy for everybody to understand. (May 2012) |
Incommensurability is the idea that it is possible to see the world in multiple ways, and that there is not a fair method to see which way is right. Some people think that it is possible that scientific traditions (called paradigms) can be incommensurable: it is not really possible to say which one is right. This idea has been defended by Thomas Kuhn. He wrote: when paradigms change, the world changes with them. Paul Feyerabend was another philosopher who said that incommensurability was possible in scientific topics. He wrote that it is important to remember this, because it means that it is possible to say things that are not scientific, but also not wrong.
So put in plainer English, it means that two theories, or even opinions are not comparable, because they are in context with different people or situations and cannot be applied in both scenarios.
In popular culture [change]
The concept of incommensurability is dramatized in the 2006 movie Idiocracy,[1] when U.S. Army scientist Joe Bauers attempts to explain before a full Cabinet meeting his theory that the nation's crops would be better irrigated with water rather than with a sports drink.
References [change]
- ↑ "Idiocracy Review". cinemablend.com. 2012. http://www.cinemablend.com/reviews/Idiocracy-1775.html. Retrieved 13 March 2012.
