Hacker ApprovedDepartments

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn

by Thomas Kuhn

Shares rank 26 of 152 nonfiction books by recommenders

People recommend it as a detailed analysis of how scientific fields change, and as a work worth rereading for the history and philosophy of science.

People recommend it as a detailed analysis of how scientific fields change, and as a work worth rereading for the history and philosophy of science.

8 people gave an opinion

recommend it
8
criticize it
0
approval share
100%
Each figure is one person. RecommendsCriticizes

Recommended in 5 of 13 months

  1. November 2025: recommended
  2. December 2025: not recommended
  3. January 2026: recommended
  4. February 2026: not recommended
  5. March 2026: recommended
  6. April 2026: not recommended
  7. May 2026: recommended
  8. June 2026: not recommended
  9. July 2026: not recommended
  10. August 2026: not recommended
  11. September 2026: not recommended
  12. October 2026: recommended
  13. November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)

Why it doesn’t carry the badge

  • 8 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, not met.
  • Nobody criticizes itNeeds 2 to 1 or better, met.
  • Recommended in 5 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, met.

The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works

What people say about it

The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.

Why people recommend it

Each mark is one comment

  • Detailed analysis of scientific change

    “I found Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" helpful on this topic.”

    Comment from 12 May 2026 in “Is This Why Science Advances One Funeral at a Time?”

    “See Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions for a detailed analysis”

    Comment from 18 May 2026 in “Illusions of Understanding in the Sciences”
  • Standard work on philosophy of science

    “either general or concrete work in the history and philosophy of science, like Thomas Kuhn's "Structure of scientific revolutions"”

    Comment from 1 Jan 2026 in “Who Invented the Transistor?”

    “I can recommend both "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions"”

    Comment from 24 Mar 2026 in “AI Risks "Hypernormal" Science”

Other nonfiction books people recommend

The four most recommended other nonfiction books, with the same counts for each, so you can compare like for like. The tick on each bar marks the 2 to 1 line the badge needs.

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn compared with 4 alternatives
ProductRecommendCriticizeApprovalMonthsOwnedBadge
The Cuckoo's Eggby Cliff Stoll400100%8—Approved
Amusing Ourselves to Deathby Neil Postman360100%91 yr3 ownersApproved
The Anxious Generationby Jonathan Haidt241267%10—Approved
Bullshit Jobsby David Graeber201263%8——
The Structure of Scientific Revolutionsby Thomas KuhnThis page80100%5——
See all 152 nonfiction books, ranked

What people said

5 of the 8 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.

“it's time to re-read Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions”

RecommendsComment from 19 Oct 2026 in “There's never been a better time to go into math (by: 3blue1brown) [video]”

“See Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions for a detailed analysis”

RecommendsComment from 18 May 2026 in “Illusions of Understanding in the Sciences”

“I found Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" helpful on this topic.”

RecommendsComment from 12 May 2026 in “Is This Why Science Advances One Funeral at a Time?”

“I can recommend both "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions"”

RecommendsComment from 24 Mar 2026 in “AI Risks "Hypernormal" Science”

“either general or concrete work in the history and philosophy of science, like Thomas Kuhn's "Structure of scientific revolutions"”

RecommendsComment from 1 Jan 2026 in “Who Invented the Transistor?”

Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.