Some of these involve making subjective judgments about how to weigh different values that may pull in different directions (methodological incommensurability).
Methodological incommensurability presents the most severe challenge to views about progress and rationality in the sciences.
Although the theory-dependence of observation plays a significant role in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, neither it nor methodological incommensurability could account for all the phenomena that Kuhn wanted to capture with the notion of incommensurability.
The thesis of methodological incommensurability can also be illustrated through the Copernican example.
Methodological incommensurability (§4.1 above) denies that there are universal methods for making inferences from the data.
The incommensurability illustrated above whereby puzzle-solutions from different eras of normal science are evaluated by reference to different paradigms, is methodological incommensurability.
Another source of methodological incommensurability is the fact that proponents of competing paradigms may not agree on which problems a candidate paradigm should solve (1962/1970a, 148).
Methodological incommensurability is the idea that there are no shared, objective standards of scientific theory appraisal, so that there are no external or neutral standards that univocally determine the comparative evaluation of competing theories (Sankey and Hoyningen-Huene 2001, xiii).
We can see a similarly explosive incommensurability in Ralph Ellison's "Invisible Man," which changes styles radically from page to page and from section to section.
However, morality is usually thought to involve an action guiding element, and so widespread incommensurability among moral values seems much more worrying than incommensurability in aesthetic values.
