These revolutions, he said, came only after long periods of tradition-bound normal science.

As long as there is consensus within the discipline, normal science continues.

Crises are often resolved within the context of normal science.

Paradigms are not corrigible by normal science at all.

Indeed, as we have already seen, normal science ultimately leads only to the recognition of anomalies and to crises.

Hypotheses, by definition, require further empirical assessment, and are a part of normal science.

It is necessary for normal science to be to a large extent uncritical.

The paradigm shift, in contrast to "normal science," means crisis.

It is in contrast to his idea of normal science.

They generally agreed, too, that his pivotal distinction between revolutionary and normal science was hard to sustain.