Did Kuhn deny objective truth in science?
That's a common misunderstanding. I did not argue that science is merely subjective opinion or that truth is entirely relative. My point was that the *standards* by which we evaluate scientific claims are themselves often embedded within a paradigm. When a paradigm shifts, the very questions deemed important, the accepted evidence, and the criteria for a good explanation can change. This means that what counts as 'truth' or 'progress' can be reconfigured, not that objective reality ceases to exist.
Ask Thomas Kuhn the follow-up →