THE WORD: “PARADIGM”  

In this day and age, people often use the word “paradigm” with contempt because it has become an overused term.  The all too often just a buzz word, paradigm, can have just about any meaning the user wants.  Often the butt of jokes, it can baffle or it can just turn your stomach. Finding a good definition of the word as it is commonly used is tricky and saying the word can often cause prickles down the spine of some critics.  However its original connotation was not always so shaky. 

Historically the word had a concrete meaning referring to rules of grammar, and traditionally it was used only in this very narrow context until 1970 when T.S. Kuhn wrote his book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.  He needed a word to describe his original idea.   He drew upon this rarely used term to label his concept, and with this connotation the word “paradigm” is a very well defined term.  Since it is the concept not the tag that I wish to explore, whenever I use the term, “paradigm,” I am referring to Kuhn’s original narrow and exact definition which I will now describe.   

REVIEW OF KUHN’S CONCEPT 

There is a set of axioms or rules that all scientists agree are basic and do not need any proof because they are just plain true.  This collection of truths is defined by Kuhn as a paradigm. Kuhn was interested in describing a difficult process that humans must go through in order to advance their knowledge of science.  As a consequence of his observations, he determined that the growth of human knowledge is neither smooth nor gradual, but that advances in science occur in bursts.  Science advances for a while in ‘quiet mode,’ making incremental advancements in knowledge and solving well defined problems.  Quiet time is usually long enough to provide the common illusion that scientific advances are continuous and progress is steady.   During this harmonious phase, scientists enhance the body of knowledge guided by the paradigm on which they all have agreed. 

Then a revolution occurs. 

The apple cart is upset. 

A discontinuity of thought takes place, and a critical mass people abruptly reject their most beloved assumptions (paradigms.)  Torturously, the old set of rules gives way to a totally new set of rules.

This turbulent event is what Kuhn calls a “paradigm shift.”  

This process is a result of how the brain works.  The human mind looks for patterns to build knowledge and make predictions.  The rules for driving a car on the road form such a pattern.  Road rules allow drivers to predict what others drivers will do, so that two cars do not end up in the same place at the same time.  O.K., it not a hundred percent perfect system, but for the most part it does work very well.

In acquiring knowledge or skills, patterns are also very important.  However there can be no pattern without having some initial basic understanding.  Think of the brain as if it were a computer.  It needs to boot up with some operating system before it can place new data into its memory banks.  

 Establishing patterns is like establishing habits. 

Humans have habits, which are hard to establish, but once they are established, they are hard to break.  For instance, the New York driver may have trouble driving in London because the driving rules are different and because is old habits get in his way.  Likewise, it is a difficult process to establish a paradigm that a whole group can agree on, one that is reasonably free of contradictions and one that can solve common problems.  Just as a habit is difficult to break, once that paradigm is in place there is a great deal of opposition from the entire group to change it.

Resistance to a paradigm change can be so great that in some cases change just doesn’t happen even when it would be advantageous.  So Kuhn defined a paradigm as a frame of reference that researchers must have in place before they can even begin to investigate their field of study.  It is a set of assumptions that most of the group look upon as true and there is no need to even question them. It is the mindset of this community which guides their expectations, establishes the questions for which they seek answers, and solves problems.  It is the foundation for the building of meaning. 

The paradigm is basic to acquiring useful knowledge. 

Once established, the paradigm is resistant to change.  However it can change.  Calm is the word Kuhn used to describe the period when a paradigm dominates, and turbulent is the word Kuhn used to describe the period when the paradigm shifts.  A paradigm can have some slack.  Minor contradictions are tolerated, but major ones must imply that someone did something very wrong to obtain such an incompatible result.

A good paradigm is open-ended. 

This allows for the advancement of knowledge over a period of time and actually motivates scientists to do the work they do.   As an example, Galileo established a paradigm for the movement of planets around the Sun.  This open-ended paradigm led Newton into formulating the laws of gravity nearly 100 years later. 

Paradigms are routine. 

Students are instructed in all the aspects of the paradigm so that it becomes automatic. A Geometry student learns axioms in Euclidean Geometry.  The Axioms are used to prove theorems which in turn are used to prove any number of real geometrical problems. The axioms are assumed to be true.  By formalizing the axioms in the geometric literature, this paradigm is constantly being reinforced by the educational institutions and textbooks.  This makes the paradigm durable, and it could even be described as being rigid. 

Another example of a paradigm fostered by the educational system is the typing method we use today.  It was conceived in the beginning when typewriters were slow and clumsy.  The keyboard was set up to purposely slow the typist down since a speedy typist could jam the keys.  Modern typists with today’s machines could improve their speed and accuracy if the keys were rearranged on the keyboard.  Some have even made this suggestion.  However, so far these plans have failed.  Why?  Our current typing skills would have to be relearned, and it is the educators that find it too uncomfortable to make the switch.  Since educators train educators, the outdated keyboard arrangement endures. 

However, in spite of all this built in rigidity, under certain circumstances paradigms do shift. As scientists investigate, sometimes they find contradictions to the paradigm.  Usually, these contradictions are handled with fine tuning the paradigm or patching it, or with just ignoring the incongruity. 

Paradigm Shifts are a time of crisis

As the number and frequency of these inconsistencies accumulate, some people will be encouraged to bid farewell that the old paradigm.  This is an uncomfortable time which Kuhn calls a time of crisis.  For instance, at one time humans believed that the Sun rotated around the Earth.  This belief led to contradictions in data collected by Copernicus and Kepler.  A crisis developed that called the current belief system into question.  From this crisis there emerged a new paradigm that the Earth and planets rotated around the Sun.  However, at one time the crisis was very real. 

New answers lead to new questions.

Also there was a time when humans thought the speed of light was infinite.  In 1677, Roemer purposed that the speed was finite.  This idea ran counter to the prevailing wisdom of the time and caused a great deal of controversy among leading scientists. It took another quarter century before the scientific community was willing to accept a finite speed of light.

This example also illustrates another aspect of a paradigm shift.  New questions are asked that were never thought of before.  The question in this case was how fast is the speed of light?  Before when the speed of light was thought to be infinite, the idea of measuring it was inconceivable.  The new paradigm allow scientist to see old data in a new finite “light.” 

So first is the crisis which is followed by the shift which is followed by new activity prompted by new questions. 

Who are the instigators of  paradigm shifts?

Who dreams up these new paradigms and causes old ones to shift?  The people who have a lot invested in the old paradigm find it the more difficult to give it up.  So, it is often the initiates, people from other disciplines or people in the right place at the wrong time who are the freethinkers willing to accept the hostility of the establishment or to work in secret.

The new evidence gradually accumulates over a period of time, but the shift when it happens is usually sudden.  The shift happens when a critical mass of well-informed people find the new paradigm acceptable. Prevailing constructs are out of fashion, and the new constructs are instantly in fashion.   

Then what happens? 

According to Kuhn, after a “shift” there is a rush of problem solving as the most of the critical population embraces the new frame of reference.  However, not everyone has the capacity for change; some will fade into the framework of their old construction.