CIAO DATE: 04/2011
December 2010
Human Rights & Human Welfare (University of Denver)
In his seminal work on the history of scientific development, Thomas Kuhn described the structure of that development as revolutionary in nature, occurring at that point in time “in which an older paradigm is replaced in whole or in part by an incompatible one.”1 The impetus for this paradigm shift is malfunction—“scientific revolutions are inaugurated by a growing sense … that an existing paradigm has ceased to function adequately in the exploration of an aspect of nature to which that paradigm itself had previously led the way…. [T]he sense of malfunction that can lead to crisis is prerequisite to revolution.”2 Kuhn himself analogized his conception of the theory and operation of scientific revolutions to political revolutions, drawing out parallels in genesis, form and function between the two. The notion of revolutionary change, or paradigm shifts, itself provides a useful framework to judge the evolution, current state, and potential future of international human rights and criminal law. Although the analogy must necessarily be incomplete, as is the analogy between scientific and political revolutions, it does go a long way in explaining how the current system of international justice has reached its present state, and what may need to occur before that system can develop further.
Resource link: In Search of an "Action Principle" [PDF] - 209K