In his work, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), Kuhn attempts at a correct empirical description of science as it is practiced. In the said work, Kuhn argues that science does not progress cumulatively but by what he calls "Scientific revolutions." Many critics and commentators have found Kuhn’s account of science implausible. Amongst his critics, we can mention Karl Popper, Allan Musgrave, Larry Laudan and Imre Lakatos. All these critics are in agreement that Kuhn’s account of science may not only be relativistic but it may also lead to scientific irrationalism. Kuhn defends his position in his later work, The Essential Tension (1977). This work is aimed at showing that Kuhn defends what cannot be found in his work, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962). In this respect, we show that Kuhn’s account of science is scientifically irrational and that, contrary to Kuhn’s claim that science progresses by revolutions, science progresses cumulatively. This work targets scholars of philosophy and the social sciences at large.