Paradigms Unit Three is a continuation and synthesis of the concepts raised in the preceding unit. This unit concentrates on paradigms, or, the belief systems through which we filter reality to create our own version of reality. Few human beings have ever been entirely capable of observing the world in a totally detached manner. Those few who have we refer to as mystics. The vast majority of humankind choose to hold certain beliefs (within their comfort zone), then arrange reality accordingly. We are our own beliefs, and we do create our own reality, or at the very least our own interpretation of reality.                         

The belief structure with which we view reality is our paradigm. There are individual paradigms, such as our selection of a denominational religious belief system that translates into our understanding of morality. in economics is free market economy better than centrally planned economy, or is the
reverse true? There are many adherents for both positions. In religion there exists an ongoing controversy between fundamentalists, or
scriptural literalists, and evolutionists. Many well educated individuals can be found lining up on opposite sides of the issue. In politics, is democracy the preferred form of government, and if so, for every culture, no matter what its stage of development? Or, are benevolent authoritarian systems really much more functional? What is "best" is oftentimes simply predetermined choice. A paradigm is simply a prescribed way of looking at a system and interpreting it according to one's chosen beliefs.                                             

There have been generalized paradigms that dominated particular epochs. The ancient world was enmeshed in cyclicalism, a fatalistic view held by peoples ignorant of physical laws, and that claimed that all natural manifestations were actions of specific anthropomorphic gods. Powerless
against these concocted gods, humanity felt itself doomed to a cycle of endless, meaningless, and repetitious activity within time. Obviously, little human progress could be achieved within such a framework. Christianity soon obliterated cyclicalism. The Christian belief in the central and unique circumstances of the Redemption both placed meaning in history and gradually diminished belief in its repetitive nature (of which reincarnation is one manifestation). Now there was meaning in history; it was to prepare for eternity. And an active intervening Divine Providence led the way. So the replacement dominant paradigm for the cyclical view was the providential view, which held sway in western culture until the modern era. If the world was other world oriented why be interested in things of
this world? In art, literature, music, architecture, the emphasis of the medieval period was on religious themes to the exclusion of secular concerns. The latter were held effectively in check by the dire consequences attendant to being branded a heretic. Yet the Renaissance advanced humanism and the Reformation broke the hold of the medieval church on individual beliefs. Serious inquiry into the nature of the physical world had begun.                                                            

The seventeenth century produced the Newtonian World Machine, and eighteenth century French thinkers such as Condorcet, Fontenelle, and Turgot, proposed the doctrine of indefinite human progress--on the physical plane. This doctrine was based on the belief that human knowledge increases with each generation because each generation possesses a more advanced knowledge base as a starting point than that of its predecessor. And all this was due to the new scientific inquiry. With Turgot, then, begins the dominant modern paradigm, the scientific paradigm. This view is very aptly advanced by Carl Sagan in our next unit. Suffice it to state for the time being that the scientific paradigm holds that absolute validation of any "fact" or hypothesis can only be determined by employing the scientific method. Value is attached to what is scientific, and other forms of inquiry are consequently devalued. While the rigors of scientific investigation can certainly not be challenged, universal application of the scientific approach to the entire spectrum of the human experience is being debated in some quarters. In the units with Sagan and Talbot, it is anticipated that their respective positions will be made quite clear, and that you will all participate in the debate, 

What is a paradigm?

What are the limitations of being dominated by a specific paradigm?

Speculate on what you think might be the next dominant paradigm.