Was it good or bad that Kuhn's "postmodernism" triumphed over Popper's "positivism"?

A provocative look at a milestone confrontation in the history of science.

In 1965, Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper met at the University of London in one of the most significant (as it would turn out) philosophical debates of the 20th century. The stakes were nothing less than the soul of science, and no field was left untouched by the consequences of the confrontation.

Today, Kuhn's seminal book, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions," remains one of the most discussed and best-selling academic works of the past decades. In contrast, Popper's seminal work, "The Logic of Scientific Discovery," has fallen into relative obscurity.

Steve Fuller argues that not only did this victory have controversial consequences, but both thinkers were misunderstood along the way. Among other things, the debate raises a vital question: can science be an independent, progressive force within society, or is it destined to function as the technical arm of the military-industrial complex?