Toulmin, S. E. (1970a). Does the distinction between normal and revolutionary science hold water? In I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 39-47). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Scientific Prediction in the Beginning of the “Historical Turn”: Stephen Toulmin and Thomas Kuhn

  AUTHORS: Wenceslao J. Gonzalez

  KEYWORDS: Toulmin; Kuhn; Scientific Prediction; Historical Turn; Similarities; Differences

  JOURNAL NAME: Open Journal of Philosophy, Vol.3 No.2, May 29, 2013

  ABSTRACT: This paper considers the similarities and differences between Toulmin and Kuhn on the problem of prediction. The context of the analysis is the beginning of the “historical turn” in philosophy of science (i.e., the period before the 1965 international colloquium held at Bedford College). The comparison between these authors takes into account several levels: semantic, logical, epistemological, methodological, ontological, and axiological. The main goal is to analyze whether there are influences of Toulmin in Kuhn regarding scientific prediction or, at least, if the former reached similar positions to the latter on the issue of the role of prediction in science.