Meaning of word paradigms

In science and philosophy, a paradigm () is a distinct set of concepts or thought patterns, including theories, research methods, postulates, and standards for what constitute legitimate contributions to a field. The word paradigm is Greek in origin, meaning «pattern», and is used to illustrate similar occurrences.

Etymology[edit]

Paradigm comes from Greek παράδειγμα (paradeigma), «pattern, example, sample»^[1] from the verb παραδείκνυμι (paradeiknumi), «exhibit, represent, expose»^[2] and that from παρά (para), «beside, beyond»^[3] and δείκνυμι (deiknumi), «to show, to point out».^[4]

In classical (Greek-based) rhetoric, a paradeigma aims to provide an audience with an illustration of a similar occurrence. This illustration is not meant to take the audience to a conclusion, however it is used to help guide them to get there.

One way of how a paradeigma is meant to guide an audience would be exemplified by the role of a personal accountant. It is not the job of a personal accountant to tell a client exactly what (and what not) to spend money on, but to aid in guiding a client as to how money should be spent based on the client’s financial goals. Anaximenes defined paradeigma as «actions that have occurred previously and are similar to, or the opposite of, those which we are now discussing.»^[5]

The original Greek term παράδειγμα (paradeigma) was used by scribes in Greek texts (such as Plato’s dialogues Timaeus (c. 360 BCE) and Parmenides) as one possibility for the model or the pattern that the demiurge supposedly used to create the cosmos.^[6][7]

The English-language term paradigm has technical meanings in the fields of grammar (as applied, for example, to declension and conjugation — the 1900 Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the technical use of paradigm only in the context of grammar) and of rhetoric (as a term for an illustrative parable or fable). In linguistics, Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) used paradigm to refer to a class of elements with similarities (as opposed to syntagma — a class of elements expressing relationship.^[8]).

The Merriam-Webster Online dictionary defines one usage of paradigm as «a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated; broadly: a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind.»^[9]

The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (2008) attributes the following description of the term in the history and philosophy of science to Thomas Kuhn’s 1962 work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions:

Kuhn suggests that certain scientific works, such as Newton’s Principia or John Dalton’s New System of Chemical Philosophy (1808), provide an open-ended resource: a framework of concepts, results, and procedures within which subsequent work is structured. Normal science proceeds within such a framework or paradigm. A paradigm does not impose a rigid or mechanical approach, but can be taken more or less creatively and flexibly.^[10]

Scientific paradigm[edit]

The Oxford English Dictionary defines a paradigm as «a pattern or model, an exemplar; a typical instance of something, an example».^[11] The historian of science Thomas Kuhn gave the word its contemporary meaning when he adopted the word to refer to the set of concepts and practices that define a scientific discipline at any particular period of time. In his book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (first published in 1962), Kuhn defines a scientific paradigm as: «universally recognized scientific achievements that, for a time, provide model problems and solutions to a community of practitioners,^[12] i.e.,

• what is to be observed and scrutinized
• the kind of questions that are supposed to be asked and probed for answers in relation to this subject
• how these questions are to be structured
• what predictions made by the primary theory within the discipline
• how the results of scientific investigations should be interpreted
• how an experiment is to be conducted, and what equipment is available to conduct the experiment.

In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn saw the sciences as going through alternating periods of normal science, when an existing model of reality dominates a protracted period of puzzle-solving, and revolution, when the model of reality itself undergoes sudden drastic change. Paradigms have two aspects. Firstly, within normal science, the term refers to the set of exemplary experiments that are likely to be copied or emulated. Secondly, underpinning this set of exemplars are shared preconceptions, made prior to – and conditioning – the collection of evidence.^[13] These preconceptions embody both hidden assumptions and elements that Kuhn describes as quasi-metaphysical.^[14] The interpretations of the paradigm may vary among individual scientists.^[15]

Kuhn was at pains to point out that the rationale for the choice of exemplars is a specific way of viewing reality: that view and the status of «exemplar» are mutually reinforcing. For well-integrated members of a particular discipline, its paradigm is so convincing that it normally renders even the possibility of alternatives unconvincing and counter-intuitive. Such a paradigm is opaque, appearing to be a direct view of the bedrock of reality itself, and obscuring the possibility that there might be other, alternative imageries hidden behind it. The conviction that the current paradigm is reality tends to disqualify evidence that might undermine the paradigm itself; this in turn leads to a build-up of unreconciled anomalies. It is the latter that is responsible for the eventual revolutionary overthrow of the incumbent paradigm, and its replacement by a new one. Kuhn used the expression paradigm shift (see below) for this process, and likened it to the perceptual change that occurs when our interpretation of an ambiguous image «flips over» from one state to another.^[16] (The rabbit-duck illusion is an example: it is not possible to see both the rabbit and the duck simultaneously.) This is significant in relation to the issue of incommensurability (see below).

An example of a currently accepted paradigm would be the standard model of physics. The scientific method allows for orthodox scientific investigations into phenomena that might contradict or disprove the standard model; however grant funding would be proportionately more difficult to obtain for such experiments, depending on the degree of deviation from the accepted standard model theory the experiment would test for. To illustrate the point, an experiment to test for the mass of neutrinos or the decay of protons (small departures from the model) is more likely to receive money than experiments that look for the violation of the conservation of momentum, or ways to engineer reverse time travel.

Mechanisms similar to the original Kuhnian paradigm have been invoked in various disciplines other than the philosophy of science. These include: the idea of major cultural themes,^[17][18] worldviews (and see below), ideologies, and mindsets. They have somewhat similar meanings that apply to smaller and larger scale examples of disciplined thought. In addition, Michel Foucault used the terms episteme and discourse, mathesis, and taxinomia, for aspects of a «paradigm» in Kuhn’s original sense.

Paradigm shifts[edit]

In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn wrote that «the successive transition from one paradigm to another via revolution is the usual developmental pattern of mature science» (p. 12).

Paradigm shifts tend to appear in response to the accumulation of critical anomalies as well as in the form of the proposal of a new theory with the power to encompass both older relevant data and explain relevant anomalies. New paradigms tend to be most dramatic in sciences that appear to be stable and mature, as in physics at the end of the 19th century. At that time, a statement generally attributed to physicist Lord Kelvin famously claimed, «There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement.»^[19] Five years later, Albert Einstein published his paper on special relativity, which challenged the set of rules laid down by Newtonian mechanics, which had been used to describe force and motion for over two hundred years. In this case, the new paradigm reduces the old to a special case in the sense that Newtonian mechanics is still a good model for approximation for speeds that are slow compared to the speed of light. Many philosophers and historians of science, including Kuhn himself, ultimately accepted a modified version of Kuhn’s model, which synthesizes his original view with the gradualist model that preceded it. Kuhn’s original model is now generally seen as too limited^{[citation needed]}.

Some examples of contemporary paradigm shifts include:

• In medicine, the transition from «clinical judgment» to evidence-based medicine
• In social psychology, the transition from p-hacking to replication^[20]
• In software engineering, the transition from the Rational Paradigm to the Empirical Paradigm ^[21]
• In artificial intelligence, the transition from classical AI to data-driven AI ^[22]

Kuhn’s idea was, itself, revolutionary in its time. It caused a major change in the way that academics talk about science; and, so, it may be that it caused (or was part of) a «paradigm shift» in the history and sociology of science. However, Kuhn would not recognize such a paradigm shift. Being in the social sciences, people can still use earlier ideas to discuss the history of science.

Paradigm paralysis[edit]

Perhaps the greatest barrier to a paradigm shift, in some cases, is the reality of paradigm paralysis: the inability or refusal to see beyond the current models of thinking.^[23] This is similar to what psychologists term confirmation bias and the Semmelweis reflex. Examples include rejection of Aristarchus of Samos’, Copernicus’, and Galileo’s theory of a heliocentric solar system, the discovery of electrostatic photography, xerography and the quartz clock.^{[citation needed]}

Incommensurability[edit]

Kuhn pointed out that it could be difficult to assess whether a particular paradigm shift had actually led to progress, in the sense of explaining more facts, explaining more important facts, or providing better explanations, because the understanding of «more important», «better», etc. changed with the paradigm. The two versions of reality are thus incommensurable. Kuhn’s version of incommensurability has an important psychological dimension. This is apparent from his analogy between a paradigm shift and the flip-over involved in some optical illusions.^[16] However, he subsequently diluted his commitment to incommensurability considerably, partly in the light of other studies of scientific development that did not involve revolutionary change.^[24] One of the examples of incommensurability that Kuhn used was the change in the style of chemical investigations that followed the work of Lavoisier on atomic theory in the late 18th Century.^[16] In this change, the focus had shifted from the bulk properties of matter (such as hardness, colour, reactivity, etc.) to studies of atomic weights and quantitative studies of reactions. He suggested that it was impossible to make the comparison needed to judge which body of knowledge was better or more advanced. However, this change in research style (and paradigm) eventually (after more than a century) led to a theory of atomic structure that accounts well for the bulk properties of matter; see, for example, Brady’s General Chemistry.^[25] According to P J Smith, this ability of science to back off, move sideways, and then advance is characteristic of the natural sciences,^[26] but contrasts with the position in some social sciences, notably economics.^[27]

This apparent ability does not guarantee that the account is veridical at any one time, of course, and most modern philosophers of science are fallibilists. However, members of other disciplines do see the issue of incommensurability as a much greater obstacle to evaluations of «progress»; see, for example, Martin Slattery’s Key Ideas in Sociology.^[28][29]

Subsequent developments[edit]

Opaque Kuhnian paradigms and paradigm shifts do exist. A few years after the discovery of the mirror-neurons that provide a hard-wired basis for the human capacity for empathy, the scientists involved were unable to identify the incidents that had directed their attention to the issue. Over the course of the investigation, their language and metaphors had changed so that they themselves could no longer interpret all of their own earlier laboratory notes and records.^[30]

Imre Lakatos and research programmes[edit]

However, many instances exist in which change in a discipline’s core model of reality has happened in a more evolutionary manner, with individual scientists exploring the usefulness of alternatives in a way that would not be possible if they were constrained by a paradigm. Imre Lakatos suggested (as an alternative to Kuhn’s formulation) that scientists actually work within research programmes.^[31] In Lakatos’ sense, a research programme is a sequence of problems, placed in order of priority. This set of priorities, and the associated set of preferred techniques, is the positive heuristic of a programme. Each programme also has a negative heuristic; this consists of a set of fundamental assumptions that – temporarily, at least – takes priority over observational evidence when the two appear to conflict.

This latter aspect of research programmes is inherited from Kuhn’s work on paradigms,^{[citation needed]} and represents an important departure from the elementary account of how science works. According to this, science proceeds through repeated cycles of observation, induction, hypothesis-testing, etc., with the test of consistency with empirical evidence being imposed at each stage. Paradigms and research programmes allow anomalies to be set aside, where there is reason to believe that they arise from incomplete knowledge (about either the substantive topic, or some aspect of the theories implicitly used in making observations.

Larry Laudan: Dormant anomalies, fading credibility, and research traditions[edit]

Larry Laudan^[32] has also made two important contributions to the debate. Laudan believed that something akin to paradigms exist in the social sciences (Kuhn had contested this, see below); he referred to these as research traditions. Laudan noted that some anomalies become «dormant», if they survive a long period during which no competing alternative has shown itself capable of resolving the anomaly. He also presented cases in which a dominant paradigm had withered away because its lost credibility when viewed against changes in the wider intellectual milieu.

[edit]

Kuhn himself did not consider the concept of paradigm as appropriate for the social sciences. He explains in his preface to The Structure of Scientific Revolutions that he developed the concept of paradigm precisely to distinguish the social from the natural sciences. While visiting the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences in 1958 and 1959, surrounded by social scientists, he observed that they were never in agreement about the nature of legitimate scientific problems and methods. He explains that he wrote this book precisely to show that there can never be any paradigms in the social sciences. Mattei Dogan, a French sociologist, in his article «Paradigms in the Social Sciences,» develops Kuhn’s original thesis that there are no paradigms at all in the social sciences since the concepts are polysemic, involving the deliberate mutual ignorance between scholars and the proliferation of schools in these disciplines. Dogan provides many examples of the non-existence of paradigms in the social sciences in his essay, particularly in sociology, political science and political anthropology.

However, both Kuhn’s original work and Dogan’s commentary are directed at disciplines that are defined by conventional labels (such as «sociology»). While it is true that such broad groupings in the social sciences are usually not based on a Kuhnian paradigm, each of the competing sub-disciplines may still be underpinned by a paradigm, research programme, research tradition, and/ or professional imagery. These structures will be motivating research, providing it with an agenda, defining what is and is not anomalous evidence, and inhibiting debate with other groups that fall under the same broad disciplinary label. (A good example is provided by the contrast between Skinnerian radical behaviourism and personal construct theory (PCT) within psychology. The most significant of the many ways these two sub-disciplines of psychology differ concerns meanings and intentions. In PCT, they are seen as the central concern of psychology; in radical behaviourism, they are not scientific evidence at all, as they cannot be directly observed.)

Such considerations explain the conflict between the Kuhn/ Dogan view, and the views of others (including Larry Laudan, see above), who do apply these concepts to social sciences.

Handa,^[33] M.L. (1986) introduced the idea of «social paradigm» in the context of social sciences. He identified the basic components of a social paradigm. Like Kuhn, Handa addressed the issue of changing paradigm; the process popularly known as «paradigm shift». In this respect, he focused on social circumstances that precipitate such a shift and the effects of the shift on social institutions, including the institution of education. This broad shift in the social arena, in turn, changes the way the individual perceives reality.

Another use of the word paradigm is in the sense of «worldview». For example, in social science, the term is used to describe the set of experiences, beliefs and values that affect the way an individual perceives reality and responds to that perception. Social scientists have adopted the Kuhnian phrase «paradigm shift» to denote a change in how a given society goes about organizing and understanding reality. A «dominant paradigm» refers to the values, or system of thought, in a society that are most standard and widely held at a given time. Dominant paradigms are shaped both by the community’s cultural background and by the context of the historical moment. Hutchin ^[34] outlines some conditions that facilitate a system of thought to become an accepted dominant paradigm:

• Professional organizations that give legitimacy to the paradigm
• Dynamic leaders who introduce and purport the paradigm
• Journals and editors who write about the system of thought. They both disseminate the information essential to the paradigm and give the paradigm legitimacy
• Government agencies who give credence to the paradigm
• Educators who propagate the paradigm’s ideas by teaching it to students
• Conferences conducted that are devoted to discussing ideas central to the paradigm
• Media coverage
• Lay groups, or groups based around the concerns of lay persons, that embrace the beliefs central to the paradigm
• Sources of funding to further research on the paradigm

Other uses[edit]

The word paradigm is also still used to indicate a pattern or model or an outstandingly clear or typical example or archetype. The term is frequently used in this sense in the design professions. Design Paradigms or archetypes comprise functional precedents for design solutions. The best known references on design paradigms are Design Paradigms: A Sourcebook for Creative Visualization, by Wake, and Design Paradigms by Petroski.

This term is also used in cybernetics. Here it means (in a very wide sense) a (conceptual) protoprogram for reducing the chaotic mass to some form of order. Note the similarities to the concept of entropy in chemistry and physics. A paradigm there would be a sort of prohibition to proceed with any action that would increase the total entropy of the system. To create a paradigm requires a closed system that accepts changes. Thus a paradigm can only apply to a system that is not in its final stage.

Beyond its use in the physical and social sciences, Kuhn’s paradigm concept has been analysed in relation to its applicability in identifying ‘paradigms’ with respect to worldviews at specific points in history. One example is Matthew Edward Harris’ book The Notion of Papal Monarchy in the Thirteenth Century: The Idea of Paradigm in Church History.^[35] Harris stresses the primarily sociological importance of paradigms, pointing towards Kuhn’s second edition of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Although obedience to popes such as Innocent III and Boniface VIII was widespread, even written testimony from the time showing loyalty to the pope does not demonstrate that the writer had the same worldview as the Church, and therefore pope, at the centre. The difference between paradigms in the physical sciences and in historical organisations such as the Church is that the former, unlike the latter, requires technical expertise rather than repeating statements. In other words, after scientific training through what Kuhn calls ‘exemplars’, one could not genuinely believe that, to take a trivial example, the earth is flat, whereas thinkers such as Giles of Rome in the thirteenth century wrote in favour of the pope, then could easily write similarly glowing things about the king. A writer such as Giles would have wanted a good job from the pope; he was a papal publicist. However, Harris writes that ‘scientific group membership is not concerned with desire, emotions, gain, loss and any idealistic notions concerning the nature and destiny of humankind…but simply to do with aptitude, explanation, [and] cold description of the facts of the world and the universe from within a paradigm’.^[36]

See also[edit]

Footnotes[edit]

References[edit]

There are a lot of fancy-sounding words found throughout the English language and the word «paradigm» is one of them. Have you heard this word and wondered what it meant? Maybe you’ve wanted to be able to properly use this word in some of your own sentences.

A «paradigm» is defined as a typical example of something. In this way, the «typical example» can be seen as a model. There are many different ways in which this word can be used such as, «This shows an emerging paradigm in the scientific world» meaning there’s an «emerging example» there.

The Word «Paradigm» Defined

The word «paradigm» comes to us from Greek and Latin. It first originated in the 15th century. In Greek «para» means «beside» while «deiknynai» means «to display or show.» When these words are combined together to form the word «paradigm» («paradeiknyai») we derive the meaning «to display side by side.»

The Etymology of the Word «Paradigm»

The purpose of a paradigm is to provide someone with an illustration of when similar things have happened. While you’re not meant to draw a conclusion from such an illustration, a «paradigm» can help guide you in the direction of one by providing you with a personal account. While this personal account isn’t meant to tell you exactly what you should or shouldn’t do, it will help guide you in your decisions.

Depending on what dictionary you look at, you’ll get a bit of a different definition for this word. These include:

• The Merriam-Webster Dictionary: A «paradigm» is a theoretical or philosophical framework in which the experiments that are used to support theories and laws are formulated.
• The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy: Scientific works can be used as an open-ended framework for structuring the concepts, results, and procedures of subsequent works. This doesn’t mean that there’s a rigid or mechanical approach. Instead, this is to be taken flexibly and allow room for creativity.
• The Oxford Dictionary: A «paradigm» is a typical example of something.

Understanding Scientific «Paradigms»

Thomas Kuhn, an influential philosopher of science in the 20th century, adopted the word «paradigm» when referring to the concepts and practices that define a scientific discipline. In his book, «The Structure of Scientific Revolutions» he says that a scientific «paradigm» is one that’s universally recognizable so problems and solutions can be based upon it. He goes on to say that there will be «normal» times when this «paradigm» will dominate and then it’ll suddenly undergo some drastic changes.

Since a «paradigm» works in this way, Kuhn says that they have two aspects:

• When it comes to «normal» science, a «paradigm» is the set of exemplary experiments that people are likely to copy or emulate.
• There will be some shared preconceptions made before evidence has been collected. These preconceptions embody both hidden assumptions and quasi-metaphysical elements. For this reason, the interpretation of the «paradigm» itself may vary among individual scientists.

Kuhn goes to great lengths to show that the rationale we use to choose what examples we follow has to do with the way in which we view reality. This is why these «paradigms» are given the status of «exemplar.»

When someone is well-integrated within their specific discipline a «paradigm» may become so convincing that there’s no possible way for them to be able to consider any alternatives, especially if these alternatives are unconvincing or counter-intuitive in nature. Instead, these «paradigms» become opaque which means that they become the very basis for these people’s reality. When this happens there’s no longer room for any alternatives. This is because people are so convicted that their current «paradigm» is in fact reality and this disqualifies any evidence that may undermine it. This is why we have a lot of unreconciled anomalies in the world today.

Eventually, it’s these unreconciled anomalies that result in the incumbent «paradigm» being overthrown and replaced with a new «paradigm.» This is what Kuhn calls a «paradigm shift.» It’s somewhat similar to the process that’s undertaken to interpret an ambiguous image.

An example of a currently acceptable «paradigm» is the standard physics model. Thanks to the scientific method it’s possible to conduct investigations to determine whether phenomena may contradict or disprove a standard model. Unfortunately however obtaining grant money that’d allow you to conduct these types of experiments is extremely difficult. This is especially true when your experiments deviate to a large degree from the standard model that’s currently accepted. For instance, you’re far more likely to receive grant money if you were conducting experiments in regard to the mass of neutrinos or the decay of protons than if you were conducting experiments that were trying to find how the conservation of momentum could be reversed or if you were trying to engineer reverse time travel.

Various disciplines have invoked mechanisms similar to this one which is known as the Kuhnian «paradigm» and has been used in the philosophical discussion of science. Some of the other disciplines that have invoked these mechanisms include worldviews, ideologies, mindsets, and the idea that there are some major cultural themes in existence. These things are all somewhat similar in their meanings and in regard to how they apply to both smaller and larger scale examples of that discipline’s thoughts. Additionally, Michel Foucault has used the terms episteme and discourse, mathesis and taxinomy, to discuss Kuhn’s original meaning of «paradigm.»

What Paradigm Shifts Are

In Kuhn’s book entitled «The Structure of Scientific Revolutions» we’re told that the successful transition between «paradigms» is a normal developmental pattern that’s found within «mature science.» In other words, a «paradigm» shift occurs as a response to the accumulation of critical anomalies and also when a new theory is proposed that could encompass the older, relevant data and explain why such anomalies have occurred. This is why new «paradigms» are so dramatic.

This is something that happened in the area of physics near the end of the 19th century. At that time, there was a statement that had been generally attributed to the physicist Lord Kelvin. It said that he claimed that nothing new would ever again be discovered in the world of physics. Everything from that point on would merely be a «more precise measurement.» However, 5 years after Lord Kelvin said this, Albert Einstein published a paper regarding special relativity. In this paper, Einstein challenged the rules that had been established by Newtonian mechanics. For more than 200 years these rules had been used to explain force and motion. Eventually, this was accepted and led to Kuhn’s model being modified. Herein lies a popular example of what a «paradigm» shift is and how it occurs.

There have been a lot of different «paradigm» shifts that have happened throughout our history since the time of Einstein. Some of the other examples that are commonplace throughout our society today include:

• A medical «paradigm» shift occurs when something moves from a «clinical judgment» to become evidence-based medicine.
• In sociology, a «paradigm» shift occurs when something moves from p-hacking to replication.
• Software engineers deal with «paradigm» shifts when there’s a transition from the Rational Paradigm to the Empirical Paradigm.
• Artificial intelligence (AI) also deals with «paradigm» shifts when we move from classical AI to data-driven AI.

While Kuhn’s idea was revolutionary at that time, it’s since caused major changes in how we talk about academic subjects like science. In this way, we can say that Kuhn’s idea was a «paradigm» shift in regards to the history and sociology of science even though this is something that Kuhn wouldn’t recognize himself.

Example Sentences

Now that you know how to define the word «paradigm» you may want to start using it more frequently. Here are a few examples of sentences to help you get started:

• Terrance is the paradigm of a perfect gentleman.
• Thanks to Dr. Sydney’s history in the field, he’s been able to create a visual paradigm of this theory.
• The computer world has been taken by storm simply because John created such an awesome programming paradigm.
• Due to 9/11, the American government has created a new paradigm regarding domestic security.
• Although Lisa isn’t your conventional teacher, she still supports the educational paradigm that more traditional teachers use.
• Mother Theresa is a paradigm of virtue for all Catholics.
• The math teacher demonstrated the different types of angles a triangle may have by using a bendable paradigm.
• If we start over with this new construction paradigm it’s going to delay the building’s completion by about two months.
• When you’re talking about the normal economic paradigm, demand is determined by prices.
• When it comes to the corporate world, Jasmine is a paradigm of honor.

Conclusion

When you’re discussing a «paradigm» you’re discussing a common example of something which can be seen as a model. This is why this word is used so frequently: It simplifies what a person is trying to say and yet is able to still communicate the same idea. With this in mind, you may want to start using the word «paradigm» more frequently in your conversations and writing.

Last Updated:
13 Apr 2023
— Updated example sentences

1	0   0 1(formal or technology) a typical example or pattern of something a paradigm for students to copy The war was a paradigm of the destructive side of human nature.2(grammar) a set of all the different f [..]

2	0   0 paradigm late 15c., from Late Latin paradigma «pattern, example,» especially in grammar, from Greek paradeigma «pattern, model; precedent, example,» from paradeiknynai «exhibit, repres [..]

3	0   0 paradigm systematic arrangement of all the inflected forms of a word prototype: a standard or typical example; "he is the prototype of good breeding"; "he provided Americ [..]

4	0   0 paradigm noun. I. a model, trend, or representative example, as of the operations and interrelationships of a procedure, an action being analyzed, or the like. 2. an experimental construct or format of the man [..]

5	0   0 paradigm A model, pattern, or example, especially one that revolutionizes the standard approach to a subject or conventional modes of thinking in a profession or field of study. In library and information scie [..]

6	0   0 paradigm A paradigm is a pattern or an example of something. The word also connotes the ideas of a mental picture and pattern of thought. The entire concept of computers is a paradigm in that computers always follow programming. See logic.

7	0   0 paradigm The most commonly accepted definition of paradigm is that of Thomas Kuhn who describes a paradigm as the set of common beliefs and agreements shared between scientists about how problems should be understood and addressed [Kuhn, 1962].

8

0   0 paradigm A clear framework for assigning data and observation to existing theories; a way of thinking about things. In business, rigid adherence to a paradigm can blind executives to threats or opportunities. An example of a paradigm was the belief that the only practical way to sell merchandise was in a store, not over the internet.

9	0   0 paradigm (Gk: para=beside/ past/ beyond ; deiknumi=show) an example or pattern (set) of thinking. By looking at a problem from a distance, often new insight can be gained.

10

0   0 paradigm is employed, there are fundamental and overriding infrastructural issues which must be addressed at the outset, the most urgent of which are the development of enabling technologies and the creation of highly defined panels of cell types for the use of the research community National Center for Research Resources "Integrated Genomics Tech [..]

11	0   0 paradigm The term paradigm simply means exemplar: it has been used in the philosophy of science to refer to a particular thesis about the nature and development of scientific knowledge and in linguistics to re [..]

12	0   0 paradigm In the sociology of science, a coherent tradition of scientific law, theory, and assumptions that forms a distinct approach to problems.

13	0   0 paradigm Kuhn (1962) in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions addressed the problem of how scientists went about their daily work as scientists: what frames their investigations, what rules guide their pract [..]

14	0   0 paradigm (n) the generally accepted perspective of a particular discipline at a given time(n) systematic arrangement of all the inflected forms of a word(n) a standard or typical example(n) the class of al [..]

15	0   0 paradigm (n) a way of viewing the world about us. Occasionally new discoveries are made which require a paradigm shift

16	0   0 paradigm A body of theory, concepts, assumptions, and empirical evidence that constitute a formal framework for analyzing some phenomena of interest.

17	0   0 paradigm a typical example or model of something; a conceptual framework underlying the theories and practice of a scientific subject or area of inquiry.

18	0   0 paradigm A set of values, ideas, beliefs and assumptions providing a model or framework within which scientists operate, and providing guidelines for the conduct of research. These are rarely called into question until the evidence against them is overwhelming.

19	0   0 paradigm A world view, a model or pattern, a mental framework for thinking, for organizing information, and for understanding and explaining reality.

20	0   0 paradigm is the set of fundamental assumptions that influence how people think and how they perceive the world.

21	0   0 paradigm The automatic Nature of accessing word meaning.

22	0   0 paradigm The highest, most general level in a hierarchy of scientific intellectual structures. A paradigm is a generally accepted view of the nature of a scientific discipline.

23	0   0 paradigm A symbolic representation of relations. For example, a three-term contingency in which a response (R) produces a reinforcer (Rf) in the presence of a discriminative stimulus (SD) might be written as. [..]

24	0   0 paradigm The set of forms belonging to a particular word-class or member of a word-class. A paradigm can be thought of as a vertical list of forms which can occupy a slot in a syntagm. Pronounced [ˡpærədaim [..]

25	0   0 paradigm An example, model or pattern.

26	0   0 paradigm The idea of a paradigm, in the sense of a dominating principle governing a whole area of scientific research, was invented by Thomas Kuhn (1962), a …

27

0   0 paradigm a cluster of conceptual and methodological presuppositions embodied in an exemplary body of scientific work. A paradigm implicitly defines for a given scientific community the kinds of questions that may fruitfully be asked and the types of explanations to be sought (Barbour p. 33). paradigm shift

28	0   0 paradigm pretentious and overused term for a way of thinking. Often used with the erroneous assumption that «paradigms» are mutually exclusive, and often assuming that one paradigm is inherently s [..]

29	0   0 paradigm A general conception, model, or «worldview»; that may be influential in shaping the development of a discipline or subdiscipline (for example, «the classical, positivist social science [..]

30	0   0 paradigm A coherent and mutually supporting pattern of concepts, values, methods and action, amenable or claiming to be amenable, to wide application.

31	0   0 paradigm According to Thomas Kuhn, an intellectual framework for “normal” science, which is superseded by another paradigm in a scientific “revolution.”

32	0   0 paradigm A point of view in which some principles, approaches, concepts, and even theories, have been stated uniformly. A set of assumptions about reality that, when applied to a particular situation, can be u [..]

33	0   0 paradigm A system of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality. An example serving as a model or pattern; a template. * »’2000»’, «»: *: According to the Fo [..]

34	0   0 paradigm A distinctive set of thought patterns or ways of doing things.

35	0   0 paradigm Refers to a pattern or model; a collection of assumptions, concepts, practices, and values that constitutes a way of viewing reality, especially for an intellectual community that shares them.

36	0   0 paradigm In science and philosophy, a paradigm is a distinct set of concepts or thought patterns, including theories, research methods, postulates, and standards for what constitutes legitimate contributions [..]

37	0   0 paradigm A paradigm, in science and epistemology, is a distinct concept or thought pattern Paradigm may also refer to:

38	0   0 paradigm In the behavioural sciences (e.g. psychology, biology, neurosciences), an experimental paradigm, is an experimental setup that is defined by certain fine-tuned standards, and often has a theoretical b [..]

39	0   0 paradigm Paradigm is a comic book series by Matthew Cashel and Jeremy Haun.

40	0   0 paradigm Paradigm (パラダイム, Paradaimu) is a Japanese publishing company headquartered in Suginami, Tokyo Prefecture, Japan. The company mainly publishes novels based on adult visual novel video games.

41	0   0 paradigm Paradigm is a comic book series by Matthew Cashel and Jeremy Haun.

42	0   0 paradigm Paradigm is a comic book series by Matthew Cashel and Jeremy Haun.

43	0   0 paradigm Paradigm is a point-and-click adventure video game developed by Jacob Janerka for Microsoft Windows.

Dictionary.university is a dictionary written by people like you and me.
Please help and add a word. All sort of words are welcome!

Add meaning