Apply Kuhn's paradigm theory to analyze scientific progress through the cycle of normal science, anomalies, crisis, and revolution.
SkillScore78Maintained
Automatic
◆Research pack
Last verified 8/28/2026
What it changes
Passed 17 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 15 of 22 without it.
Without skill70%
With skill78%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
Formats the Implications section as a numbered list.
Formats the second section as ### Normal Science Phase.
Includes - Community: as a bullet under Dominant Paradigm.
and 6 more in the full report
3 fixed15 passed either way4 still failing1 broke
Pass-rate lift
+9 pp
Tokens
+6%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-17%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/28/2026v118 of 23 cases passed with skill · 22 comparable
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 3 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 3
Prompt
Provide a Kuhnian structural analysis of the shift from phlogiston theory to Lavoisier's oxygen theory in 18th-century chemistry. Format the output as a report named 'Paradigm Analysis: 18th-Century Chemical Revolution'. You must cover the main paradigm, normal science phase, crisis assessment, revolution evaluation, and implications.
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
Formats the report title as ## Paradigm Analysis: 18th-Century Chemical Revolution.
Missed
Passed
Includes the bullet label - Severity: under Crisis Assessment.
Missed
Passed
Formats the Implications section as a numbered list.
Missed
Passed
case-14 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/28/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md95 linessingle file
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.
Apply Kingdon's multiple streams framework to analyze how problems, policies, and politics converge to open policy windows. Use this skill when the user needs to explain why certain policies get adopted while others don't, identify policy windows and entrepreneurial opportunities, or analyze the agenda-setting process in public policy — even if they say 'why did this policy pass now', 'policy window', or 'how do issues get on the agenda'.