The revolutions postponed: scientific evidence, dominant ideologies and the defenders of status quo

Philosophers of Science have developed sophisticated models for explaining how scientific revolutions are brought about and more generally how scientists deal with facts that contradict pre-existing assumptions and theoretical concepts. Likewise historians of science and sociologists of knowledge have produced comprehensive studies on how scientific breakthroughs have sparked social revolution and how social factors fostered or hampered scientific developments. However, scientific revolutions and scientific “progress” always seem to be at the center of attention. The equally important question of why sometimes new evidence and contradicting evidence fail to trigger a scientific revolution has been largely neglected though. Improving our understanding of “called off” or “postponed” revolutions not only contributes to analyses of successful scientific revolutions. Understanding how defenders of the status quo manage to suppress new information and ignore scientific facts is crucial to understanding scientific and political controversy. This contribution therefore seeks to outline a conceptual model for probing into the “black box” of scientific revoltions. In addition it will outline a potential framework for analyzing the survival of neoclassic economic theory after the global financial crisis.