If a new paradigm was constructed, he did not feel it should be used to build upon and existing one, but that it should completely replace the existing paradigm. As mentioned before, this method of thinking does not allow for evolution or growth. If we are constantly getting rid of one paradigm and replacing it with another, it is as though we are negating the first paradigm. This process does nothing to allow us to see how science has changed, nor does it allow us to measure the past against the present. But, according to Kuhn, paradigms were immeasurable. If this is the case, how do scientists know in which direction to move if they have no idea which direction they came from? If, as Kuhn states, we only have access to the world through a paradigm, why then can't we build upon or change the paradigm? The readings give examples of changes in paradigms. A good example is the planet Uranus which was first seen as a star, then a comet and today it is seen as a planet. All of this happened because of changes in research and stepping away from an existing paradigm. Kuhn can argue the fact that he is not a relativist, but he was. His belief of science was his truth and of course, there were probably many that followed his beliefs. But, because they were true for him does not mean they stand true for the entire...

If one method is not satisfactory, why not abandon the method for a more useful one? He is a relativist because of the fact that he held steady to his beliefs. He held firm to the belief that scientist should not test a scientific theory on order to prove it true of false since they would need to test the theory against a neutral body of evidence. According to him, that body of evidence comes from the same exact paradigm that the scientist is trying to confirm.
In a sense, most of us are relativist because we hold firm to our beliefs and our truths. Our opinions are formed from our upbringing, the communities we grew up in and our independent thinking. Kuhn was indeed a relativist because of his strong belief that paradigms should not be changed. The fact that he did not step out of the box and consider other methods of thinking regarding science proves that he was a relativist. He was not open to viewing science from someone else's interpretation of methods of research. He seemed to view his truths as the only valid and absolute truths and did not appear to know that all truths are relative. Given this, it does appear the Mr. Kuhn was indeed a relativist.