Normal science that has been previously discussed in the previous chapter can now be termed as the continuous process of improvements and disagreements which are followed by different practitioners and their thoughts in the support of those theories. To further elaborate the nature first, we must recognize and limit the scope and precision of the paradigm. Paradigm popularly known as the domain knowledge gain strong following of the believers must be able to provide with the elaborated discussions and must be able to provide with the answers that may be sought from the paradigm. To further proof check the knowledge provided by the paradigm it must contain the knowledge that must be in proper support of the predictions that may be assumed by the paradigm and the knowledge should be in complete support of the relevancy that is provided by the domain. Perhaps, these are the defects that need to be monitored and they need to be catered while limiting themselves to the paradigm defined by the researchers.
Investigated By Normal Sciences
The defects that need to be investigated by normal sciences are probably now under discussion that has limited the vision and prospect of the domain. But those cross investigations further led to the improvement of the domain and providing the paradigm with more meaningful and rich knowledge resulting to widen the domain reach and providing with the proper knowledge sought by the person. Second popular but smaller class of people perceive those facts that have been provided by the paradigm tends to change the actual knowledge provided by the domain. These people lack some basic knowledge of the past history and then lead to challenge the theory which later results in the contradiction of the thoughts. Furthermore, it has also been observed the rise in demand of the theoretical and instrumental demands despite the practical application of the theory.
Such contradictions have been recorded in history as well in which the popular ones are the demonstration of the Copernican prediction of the annual parallax in which the telescope was found to be erroneous which resulted in the wrong calculation of the eclipses and lead to further changes in astronomical theories. Attempts to further improvise the paradigm are not restricted to the determination of the universal laws, they may also aim to further elaborate the quantifiable entities like Charles law or Boyles law. Keeping in mind the paradigm is not definitely restricted to the discovery of laws like these. It is often heard similar changes of such types have been observed in the history, but most of them have provided a little bit of additional knowledge without changing the exact principal of the paradigm.