Anomalies can be absorbed as puzzles without abandoning the core paradigm

Evidence

As Barry Barnes points out, however, anomalies do not speak for themselves. “What one scientist sees as an anomaly,” necessitating a revolutionary new paradigm, “another sees as a puzzle” to be solved without radical conceptual change (Barnes 1982, p. 100). WhatJensen envisaged was indeed no more than a “mini-revolution”: one likely to involve “more precise and more general theories of market efficiency and equilibrium models of the determination of asset prices under uncertainty,” but not “abandonment of the `efficiency’ concept” (Jensen 1978, pp. 96 and 100). — Donald MacKenzie, An Engine, Not a Camera, 427

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: The distinction between anomaly-triggering paradigm revolution and puzzle-solving normal science is the methodological hinge of the whole efficient-market critique — not just a finance point but a general account of how disciplines absorb disconfirming evidence.
• XREF: connects to: Paradigmatic characterization of civilizations need not reduce them to essences; Some secondary possibles vary freely without altering fundamental project

Broader Connections

• Some secondary possibles vary freely without altering fundamental project #corroborates (0.80)
• Paradigmatic characterization of civilizations need not reduce them to essences #corroborates (0.72)