•  What grounds does Kuhn give for saying that we take progress as a criterion for considering a discipline to be a science (pp. 160-162)?

•  Why is the activity of normal science bound to appear as progress (pp. 162-163)?

•  What features of normal science will tend to lead to progress?--and progress of what sort (pp. 163-166)?

•  What common characteristics does Kuhn find in scientific communities (pp. 166-168)?

•  Why will a change of paradigms seem to be progress?--and in what respects will it really be progress (pp. 169-170)?

•  In what ways does Kuhn compare scientific progress to Darwinian evolution (pp. 170-173)?

•  In what respects is Kuhn willing to grant that his view of science is a kind of relativism (p. 205)?

•  What grounds does he give for holding that it is not mere relativism (pp. 205-207)?

•  In what way does Kuhn say he has used descriptions of what science is as evidence for what it ought to be (pp. 207-208)?

•  In what ways does Kuhn grant that the history of science is similar to the history of other disciplines (pp. 208-209)?

•  What does Kuhn cite as distinguishing features of science (pp. 209-210)?