mcpbeat

Grad Paradigms

asgard-ai-platform/grad-paradigms

Apply Kuhn's paradigm theory to analyze scientific progress through the cycle of normal science, anomalies, crisis, and revolution. Use this skill when the user needs to understand why a field resists change, trace paradigm shifts in a discipline, analyze incommensurability between competing frameworks, or when they ask 'why do scientists ignore contradictory evidence', 'how do scientific revolutions happen', or 'why can't proponents of different paradigms agree'.

4k tokens
context cost
the whole folder, loaded on every use
2
files
instructions only
0
copies elsewhere
how many repositories repackaged it
223
stars on the repo
on the repository, not the skill itself

Install

one command, takes just this skill from the repository
npx skills add https://github.com/asgard-ai-platform/skills --skill grad-paradigms

What comes with it

9 780 bytes besides the instruction
examples/sample_scenario.md

The instruction itself

13 sections, as written by the author

Paradigm Theory (Kuhn)

Overview

Kuhn's paradigm theory explains scientific progress not as linear accumulation but as a cyclical process: normal science operates within a paradigm until anomalies accumulate, triggering crisis and eventually a revolutionary paradigm shift. The new paradigm is incommensurable with the old — they literally see different worlds.

When to Use

  • Analyzing why a scientific or professional field resists new ideas
  • Tracing historical shifts in dominant frameworks within a discipline
  • Understanding why debates between competing schools seem irresolvable
  • Evaluating whether a field is in normal science, crisis, or revolutionary phase

When NOT to Use

  • When analyzing incremental, non-revolutionary knowledge growth (use Lakatos instead)
  • When the focus is on individual discovery rather than community-level shifts
  • When normative evaluation of which paradigm is "better" is required (Kuhn is descriptive)

Assumptions

IRON LAW: Scientists working within a paradigm do NOT test the paradigm —
they solve puzzles defined by it. Paradigm change is a social-political
process, not a purely rational one.

Key assumptions:

  • Science operates within shared paradigms (exemplars + disciplinary matrix)
  • Normal science is puzzle-solving, not paradigm-testing
  • Anomalies are initially dismissed, not immediately investigated
  • Paradigm shifts involve gestalt switches — not gradual conversion

Methodology

Step 1: Identify the Paradigm

Define the dominant paradigm: shared exemplars, accepted methods, ontological commitments, and the community that holds them.

Step 2: Map Normal Science Activity

Identify puzzle-solving within the paradigm — what questions are considered legitimate, what methods are standard, what counts as a solution.

Step 3: Trace Anomalies and Crisis

Document anomalies (persistent puzzles the paradigm cannot solve), and assess whether they have accumulated to crisis level — marked by proliferation of ad hoc modifications and questioning of fundamentals.

Step 4: Assess Revolution or Stability

Determine whether a rival paradigm has emerged, evaluate incommensurability with the old paradigm, and trace the social process of conversion (generational replacement, institutional power shifts).

Output Format

## Paradigm Analysis: [Context]

### Dominant Paradigm
- Core exemplars: [foundational achievements that define the paradigm]
- Disciplinary matrix: [shared values, methods, symbolic generalizations]
- Community: [who subscribes to this paradigm]

### Normal Science Phase
- Legitimate puzzles: [questions the paradigm defines as worth solving]
- Standard methods: [accepted approaches]
- Anomalies identified: [persistent unsolved puzzles]

### Crisis Assessment
- Severity: [pre-crisis / emerging crisis / full crisis]
- Ad hoc modifications: [patches to save the paradigm]
- Competing candidates: [alternative paradigms emerging]

### Paradigm Shift Evaluation
- Rival paradigm: [description if one exists]
- Incommensurability points: [where old and new paradigms talk past each other]
- Conversion dynamics: [generational, institutional, evidential factors]

### Implications
1. [Current phase of the field]
2. [Likelihood and direction of potential shift]

Gotchas

  • Kuhn's "paradigm" has been criticized for vagueness — he used it in 21+ senses; be explicit about which sense you mean
  • Incommensurability does NOT mean paradigms cannot be compared at all — it means translation is imperfect
  • Not all fields have clear paradigms; Kuhn's model fits natural sciences best and applies less cleanly to social sciences
  • Normal science is not inferior to revolutionary science — it is productive and necessary
  • The winner of a paradigm shift is not necessarily "more true" — it solves more puzzles that the community currently cares about
  • Do not conflate paradigm shift with any theoretical change — Kuhn reserved it for fundamental restructuring

References

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1962/1970). *The Structure of Scientific Revolutions* (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1977). *The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change*. University of Chicago Press.
  • Hoyningen-Huene, P. (1993). *Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn's Philosophy of Science*. University of Chicago Press.

How to use it

Copy the folder

Take asgard-ai-platform/grad-paradigms from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.

Check the name does not clash

The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.