Frank Kogan

i think we have to explore what actually constitutes a "field" here -- kuhn's theory seems to presented as if science as a whole is a field, at the same time that physics-as-a-whole is a field and and biology-as-a-whole is a field and maths-as-a-whole is a field, even though all of physics and all of biology and (arguably) all of maths do not combine to be all of physics

this matters because it's not clear to me that a revolutionary shift in the use of the word "planet" had any implications for biology or maths -- somewhere late in the essay, p.29 in fact, TK says that the first shared characteristic of the kind of scientific revolution he's looking at is that it's "somewhat holistic", where "somewhat" is a giant massive handwave! (haha someone on a popular comments thread just used the phrase "slightly objective" and i think "somewhat holistic" falls in the same category of "we know what it means even tho it's strictly speaking meaningless")

i have a bunch more thoughts to come, some of which will be questions and some answers -- i am intermittently busy today and tomorrow so they will be a bit piecemeal