DISCUSSION KUHN, PARADIGM CHOICE AND THE ARBITRARINESS OF AESTHETIC CRITERIA IN SCIENCE
In his famous book 1 Kuhn argues that when scientists decide on the issue of which of several alternative paradigms should be adopted, their selection could not be conclusively justified and is based on, among other things, arbitrary considerations, some of which are aesthetic. Kulm defends the impossibility of a rational choice by relying on Wittgenstein's faJmily resemblance thesis. I have argued elsewhere that the Wittgensteinian point does not support Kulm's impossibility argument. 2 I want here to offer some reasons for rejecting the implication of Kuhn's characterization of the paradigm selection scientists might engage in. This is that when scientists make use of aesthetic considerations, invoke aesthetic standards in their efforts to select from among competing ideas, including paradigms, this constitutes something arbitrary and thus is sufficient to show that the selection is incapable of rational justification. The most frequently cited aesthetic qualities on the basis of which some idea may be accepted in science are simplicity, symmetry, and elegance. Kuhn is not alone in refering to these, and many scientists of high caliber have cited such qualities as instrumental in their decision-making. We need to ask what the significance of using this group of aesthetic qualities may be in the discussion at issue. It has to be recalled that Kuhn and others refer to the influence of such aesthetic considerations in an attempt to point to a-rational or non-rational elements in scientific thinking.
It appears that Kuhn believes that aesthetic qualities could not be rationally ascribed to something, so that it could never be the case that finding some idea or paradigm simple, symmetrical or elegant might be a rational reason for selecting that idea over some other. Yet it is interesting to note that simplicity, symmetry, and elegance are just some of many possible aesthetic qualities some object may possess. Among some artists chaos, violence, obscurity, confusion, and similar qualities are considered valuable in an aesthetically regarded object. Yet it does not seem that many scientists base their approval or support of some idea, theory, concept, paradigm, and the like on the fact that such aesthetic qualities are found in it. What explains Theory and Decision 8 (1977) 361-362. All Rights Reserved.