I don't disagree with you at some level, but I also see a lot of hype in modern science and intellectual discourse. Maybe not for all fields, but for many.
A recent paper has been making the rounds suggesting that disruptive research is becoming less common. This seems critically important for interpreting Kuhn.
Perhaps, for instance, Kuhn was writing or formulating his ideas in an unusually disruptive era. Or maybe our current era is less disruptive, and so discourse about ideas has to be approached differently, maybe more skeptically.
A recent paper has been making the rounds suggesting that disruptive research is becoming less common. This seems critically important for interpreting Kuhn.
Perhaps, for instance, Kuhn was writing or formulating his ideas in an unusually disruptive era. Or maybe our current era is less disruptive, and so discourse about ideas has to be approached differently, maybe more skeptically.