Popper and Kuhn present very different conceptions of ‘normal science’: the most common, day-to-day form of scientific inquiry. In particular, each characterizes the attitude of scientists in a very different way. Explain the view of each philosopher, and present the reasons each provides for his view. Now take a real example of a scientific discovery (it can be historical, or recent, but it should be a part of ‘normal’ science, not revolutionary science). In your view, which philosophical account—Popper’s or Kuhn’s—most accurately describes this real life example? Does the fact that one of the philosophical accounts describes the example more accurately give us a persuasive reason to accept it? Explain why or why not.
Length an formatting: Each such page is roughly about 450 words, so the range is about 1800-2700 words. The essay should use 12 point type and be double or 1.5x spaced. Make sure you have a bibliography, page numbers, and a title page.
