I have read the book some years ago. My memory of it conforms to Joe Naughton’s impression that it is basically subjectivist. The gist of his book is that each scientific theory is built on a paradigm as the result of observations (generally faulty). The predictions of the paradigm never quite match the theory, but “suffice” until the accumulation of anomalous observations is enough to cause a scientific crisis which then results in a new theory (or theories) being promulgated. When a new theory wins out, the old one is relegated to the scrap heap.
When I read the Logical Leap by David Harriman, I thought of Kuhn’s book and how much clearer and respectful Harriman is in describing the scientific process.
