Theory Of Paradigm Shifts Research Articles

통일교육 패러다임 전환론의 문제점 분석 및 대안모색을 위한 연구

This study was conducted with the aim of examining the paradigm shift theories of unification education. Each of these paradigm shifts had the following problems. The paradigm shift from security to peaceful unification has issues such as incompleteness of paradigm shift, the still central position of security, and the unclear status and conceptual establishment of the concept of “unification” when transitioning from security education to unification education. The paradigm shift to unification education by various theories of education has a problem either the maintenance or replacement of unification education, and there is also a problem that it does not present the systematic relationship between education and unification education by various theories of education. Following the emergence of post-modernity, the theory of paradigm shift in unification education has problems such as appropriateness of alternatives, appropriateness of application to the Korean modernity, and problems that do not show great difference in content from the existing new paradigm of unification education.
 In order to achieve the correct shift in the paradigm of unification education while overcoming these problems, this study suggests several things as follows.
 First, in the era of post-Cold War inter-Korean reconciliation, unification education needs to achieve a complete paradigm shift from security to unification, which refers to education for “unification” itself, which converts division consciousness to unification-oriented consciousness, and education that seeks to shift awareness from division to unification.
 Second, in order to properly realize the paradigm shift to unification education in various theories of education, such as democratic citizenship education and peace education, it is necessary to include it in the systematic connection of unification education through education theory by and sub-education for unification ideology.
 Third, the paradigm shift to post-division education following the emergence of post-modernity needs to be pursued in the context of inclusion and convergence in unification education.

К вопросу о герменевтике мультикультурализма в условиях высокой скорости информационного обмена

The All-Russian academic conference “The Nature and Specifics of Multiculturalism in Conditions of High-Speed Information Exchange” was first held at the Institute of Oriental Studies, RAS in 2023. It opened for discussion a number of fundamental issues that go beyond the theory of paradigm shifts and scientific revolutions and represent a fundamentally new expansion of universal knowledge space in the domain of cyberculture. The expansion of screen civilization is accompanied by the spread of a new type of multiculturalism. The Department of Comparative Cultural Studies of the IOS RAS invited researchers in humanities from different national academic centers to reflect on the implication of digital reality for the current epistemological transition and the hermeneutics of multiculturalism.

The Archimedean Revolution of Nicolaus Copernicus

The year 2023 marks the 550th anniversary of the birth of the Polish scholar Nicolaus Copernicus. Usually deemed one of the most emblematic examples of the scientific revolution and the theory of paradigm shift in the history of science, the heliocentric theory proposed by Copernicus in 1543 has fed the minds of philosophers and historians for centuries. Recently, increasing attention has been put on the recognition of the sources that might have influenced Copernicus’s creativity. The outcomes showed that the claims on paradigm shift are pretty shaky, because Copernicus was deliberately in dialogue with Ancient Greek and Arabic authors, and his On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres deliberately emulates Ptolemy’s Almagest. In this sense, the essence of the scientific revolution is more an attempt to recreate the debate with ancient authors then a breaking with their paradigms. This study takes a closer examination of Copernicus’s early draft on heliocentrism, the Commentariolus (1510-1515 ca.) and it argues that the birth of the heliocentric theory was first conceived as an attempt to write an Archimedes-like treatise, while the efforts to emulate Ptolemy come at a later stage. On this account, the early Copernicus can be considered an Archimedean.

Counting and Weighing: On the Role of Intuition in Philology and Linguistics

The intuition of established scholars often holds them back from appreciating revolutionary advances in the understanding of how biblical texts evolved and how to view their language in that context. Kuhn’s theory of paradigm shifts helps elucidate the current debate regarding the linguistic dating theories of Avi Hurvitz and others. We discuss these linguistic dating theories and use Richard Friedman’s book on the exodus as an example of the old paradigm. We then juxtapose it with the emerging paradigm that is founded on more robust data collection and analysis.

Modern Fiqh Paradigm in Indonesia: a Study of Nurcholish Majid’s Though

Islam as a rahmatan lil Alamin (mercy to the entire universe) religion, basically, has the passion to drive the dynamics of the human race, but in fact, it still has not reached ideal expectations because of the assumption about the door ijtihad is closed, taklid attitude, heresy and superstition, as well as textual classic ijtihad paradigm. Based on this explanation, problem formulations were stated as follows: how is the modern fiqh ijtihad paradigm built by Madjid? How is the modern fiqh ijtihad paradigm built by Madjid in Indonesia? The study used the theory of paradigm shift by Thomas S. Kuhn and theory maqasid al-shari'ah . The results of this study indicated that there was a paradigm shift from the ijtihad classical paradigm to the modern ijtihad paradigm built based on muhkamat passages, not mutashabihat passages. The paradigm shift purposes built by Madjid is to ensure the maintenance of the five principles of law construction, they are (a) maintaining religion as a means to realize the depth of faith and righteous deeds; (B) maintaining thought to realize the usage of the mind and the dynamics of science; (C) maintaining the soul in the sense of respecting and keeping the existence of human rights and fundamental freedoms; (D) maintaining the honor as a means to embody the values of equality, personal and collective dignity, and avoiding any kind of cult of other than Allah; and (e) maintaining the property as a means to maintain economic stability and equal distribution of wealth in life in Indonesia.

English Teacher Preparation, Budget Cuts, and Kuhn’s Theory of Paradigm Shifts: A Closer Look at Content Area Feedback during Student Teaching

English Teacher Preparation, Budget Cuts, and Kuhn’s Theory of Paradigm Shifts: A Closer Look at Content Area Feedback during Student Teaching

Using Structure to Understand Justice and Care as Different Worlds

When read as a theory that is supposed to mirror, represent or fit some collection of historical data, critics argue that Kuhn’s theory of paradigm shift in Structure of Scientific Revolutions fails by cherry-picking and underdetermination. When read as the ground for a socio-epistemological conception of rationality, critics argue that Kuhn’s theory fails by either the naturalistic fallacy or underarticulation. This paper suggests that we need not view Structure as a historian’s attempt to accurately depict scientific theory change or a philosopher’s attempt to suggest, more normatively, the factors we ought to consider in theory choice. Instead, we might use Kuhn’s theory as a metaphilosophical frame through which to better understand the limits of otherwise intractable philosophical debates. We can focus on Kuhn’s theory not as a proposition or model to confirm, but as something we might use as a tool for understanding. Philosophers have discussed the justice and care orientations in ethics as two theories for which there will be some common, constraining set of intuitions to confirm one theory over the other, to demonstrate that protecting rights is fundamentally more valuable that fulfilling needs or that fulfilling needs is fundamentally more valuable that protecting rights. Instead of conceptualizing this conversation as a choice between two theories, this paper looks to Ian Hacking’s interpretation of Kuhn’s paradigm concept to suggest that working in the world of justice is very different than working in the world of care, as each orientation is a paradigm with its own cognitive and contextual standards of theory assessment. To start, after Larry Laudan, each has its own ontology, methodology, aims and values. But moreover, after Ian Hacking, each has an even larger, entrenched collection of projectible predicates. Though Carol Gilligan herself uses the metaphor of gestalt shift in a few places to characterize the move from the justice to the care perspective, the insight—that what many assume to be a standard exercise in theory choice is really more of a paradigm shift—has been under theorized by ethicists and ignored by philosophers of science. This paper brings the full resources of Structure and its secondary literature to this metaethical issue, while making the larger point that Structure has an important pragmatic role to play, when it comes to the understanding philosophical debates, even if we cannot secure the truth of Kuhn’s theory.

Reflections on 100 years of the journal

In the late nineteenth century British homeopathy was dominated by the ideas of Richard Hughes, who advocated pathology as a guide to prescribing and favoured the use of low (material) potencies; he also tried to build bridges to conventional medicine. But soon after the British Homœopathic Journal began publication in 1911, a radical change occurred in British homeopathy. In the early years of the twentieth century Margaret Tyler had gone to America to become a disciple of James Tyler Kent, and on her return she published a pamphlet inwhich shecriticisedtheprevailingHughesian orthodoxy. This publication seems to have disappeared, but it is alluded to by other homeopaths of the time and it evidently caused friction, because Tyler ceased to attend the meetings of the British Homeopathic Society for a couple of years. But in 1907, in conjunction with her mother, Lady Tyler, she instituted a scholarship to send doctors to the USA to study under Kent. An early beneficiary was Dr (later Sir) John Weir. Soon after his return to London in 1909 he was appointed Compton Burnett Professor and Honorary Secretary of the British Homeopathic Society. Under the influence of Tyler and Weir in London and Robert Gibson Miller (an earlier pupil of Kent) in Glasgow, Kentianism made rapid progress towards becoming homeopathic orthodoxy in Britain. The Hughesians naturally resisted this, but they were getting old, and e in an illustration of Thomas Kuhn’s theory of paradigm shift e as they died out their ideas were replaced by those of the Kentians. The changewas pretty well complete by the end ofthe First World War. Throughout much of the twentieth century the journal largely reflected the Kentian approach. High potencies predominated, single doses were the rule, the polychrests were widely used, and there was a lot of emphasis on constitutional prescribing, which by now was considered to be the main method to use in chronic disease. Yet there were exceptions. A prominent homeopath of the time, Charles Wheeler, had a lot of respect for Hughes; see, for example, his 1935 “Random Reflections”. 1 And in 1970 Frank Bodman gave an excellent review of Hughes’s contribution in his Hughes Memorial Lecture, in which he reflected on the clash between Hughes, with his emphasis on pathology as a guide to prescribing, and those, such as John Clarke, who insisted on the need to rely on symptoms. 2

Scientific Revolution and Religious Conversion: A Closer Look at Thomas Kuhn's Theory of Paradigm-Shift

AbstractThis article seeks to show that Thomas Kuhn's theory of paradigm-shift can be used as a methodological tool in the study of religious conversion. The same way that the scientist is limited to work within a scientific paradigm, the believer can be said to exercise religion within a theological paradigm. And as anomaly can lead to science crises and a change of worldview, anomaly within the horizon of the believer can lead to existential crisis and religious reorientation. A reservation towards the application of Kuhn's theory on religious conversion is, however, proposed by the author who does not see that different worldviews necessarily are incommensurable. Religious conversion is more often than not a reorientation that combines (what Kuhn's theory would consider as) incompatible differences.

Paradigms and research programmes: is it time to move from health care economics to health economics?

As an applied subdiscipline of economics, health economics has flourished, defining itself as the study of how scarce health care resources may be used to meet our needs. This evolutionary pathway has led to health economists adopting a very 'medical' model of health, in which the predominant production function for health is health care. This paper sets out policy challenges to health economics which have arisen in light of growing recognition by governments of the socioeconomic determinants of health and their stated commitment to tackle inequalities in health. It reviews Thomas Kuhn's theory of paradigm shift and Imre Lakatos' theory of scientific research programmes in the natural sciences, favouring the latter as an explanation of the evolution of the subdiscipline of health economics. The paper brings together four recently published visions of the future of health economics-visions that are almost exclusively focused on the production, organization and distribution of health care. In contrast to these visions, in Lakatosian terms, this paper challenges the subdiscipline's core 'positive heuristic', i.e. the set of imperatives which determines how the research programme should unfold, how it may be defended, its scope and boundaries. This paper argues that health economics will need to evolve to embrace a more socioeconomic model of health and, to this end, offers for debate an expansion of Williams' diagrammatic representation of the subdiscipline. It concludes by asking whether the magnitude and the magnetism of health care policy issues will continue to prove too strong to allow health economists, should they wish, to steer their research and educational programmes more directly towards 'health' rather than 'health care' as the relevant social want.