welcome KR
On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 at 00:00, Markendeya Yeddanapudi <
markandeya101...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Raja ram Sir,
> You are another chat GPT,as extensive and as responsive,thank you Sir.
> YM
>
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 8:44 AM Rajaram Krishnamurthy <
> keyarinc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The Dynamics of Paradigm Shifts: Exploring Transformations in Thought and
>> Practice
>>
>> The technology of the paradigm. a typical example or pattern of
>> something; a model: A paradigm is a way of looking at something. The
>> word paradigm comes up a lot in the academic, scientific, and business
>> worlds. A new paradigm in business could mean a new way of reaching
>> customers and making money. In education, relying on lectures is a
>> paradigm: if you suddenly shifted to all group work, that would be a new
>> paradigm. Thus, each is a system; and from one, another gets the shape
>> differently. Hence, we grow in paradigm; in that way the old one may go
>> wrong? If that was wrong. change is also wrong. And if we were to consider
>> that for millennium years in the wrong paradigm or right paradigm is only a
>> pure assumption, seeking it through or perceiving within, our HUBBLE. So,
>> can we formulate a universal theory?
>>
>> 1. Understanding Paradigms:
>>
>> Thomas Kuhn argued that science does not evolve gradually toward truth.
>>
>> Science has a paradigm that remains constant before going through a
>> paradigm shift when current theories can’t explain some phenomenon, and
>> someone proposes a new theory.
>>
>> A scientific revolution occurs when: (i) the new paradigm better explains
>> the observations and offers a model that is closer to the objective,
>> external reality; and (ii) the new paradigm is incommensurate with the
>> old.For
>> example, Lamarckian evolution was replaced with Darwin’s theory of
>> evolution by natural selection.
>>
>> Paradigm Shift
>>
>> Thomas Kuhn attacks “development-by-accumulation” views of science, which
>> hold that science progresses linearly by accumulating theory-independent
>> facts. Kuhn looked at the history of science and argued that science does
>> not simply progress by stages based upon neutral observations (e.g.,
>> Positivism).
>>
>> For Kuhn, the history of science is characterized by revolutions in
>> scientific outlook. Scientists have a worldview or “paradigm.” A paradigm
>> is a universally recognizable scientific achievement that, for a time,
>> provides model problems and solutions to a community of practitioners.
>>
>> A paradigm is a basic framework of assumptions, principals and methods
>> from which the members of the community work.
>>
>> It is a set of norms that tell scientists how to think and behave, and
>> although
>> there are rival schools of thought in science, there is still a single
>> paradigm that all scientists accept uncritically.
>>
>> Scientists accept the dominant paradigm until anomalies are thrown up.
>> Scientists
>> then begin to question the basis of the paradigm itself; new theories
>> emerge which challenge the dominant paradigm. Eventually, one of these new
>> theories becomes accepted as the new paradigm. And here also we built
>> the paradigm and we are questioning it to change. Thus, we are always under
>> the pressures of a new paradigm.
>>
>> During different periods of science, certain perspectives held sway over
>> the thinking of researchers. A particular work may “define the legitimate
>> problems and methods of a research field for succeeding generations of
>> practitioners.”
>>
>> According to Kuhn, knowledge that does not evolve according to the four
>> main phases may not be considered scientific.
>>
>> paradigm shift cycle
>>
>> Phase 1: Pre-science
>>
>> The pre-paradigmatic state refers to a period before a scientific
>>
>> consensus has been reached.
>>
>> Disorganized and diverse activity.
>>
>> The constant debate over fundamentals.
>>
>> As many theories as there are theorists.
>>
>> No commonly accepted observational basis. The conflicting theories are
>> constituted with their own set of theory-dependent observations.
>>
>> Phase 2: Normal Science
>>
>> (most common – science is usually stable)
>>
>> A paradigm is established, which lays the foundations for legitimate work
>> within the discipline. Scientific work then consists of the articulation of
>> the paradigm in solving puzzles that it throws up.
>>
>> A paradigm is a conventional basis for research; it sets a precedent.
>>
>> Puzzles that resist solutions are seen as anomalies.
>>
>> Anomalies are tolerated and do not cause the rejection of the theory, as
>> scientists are confident these anomalies can be explained over time.
>>
>> Scientists spend much of their time in the Model Drift step, battling
>> anomalies that have appeared. They may or may not know this or acknowledge
>> it.
>>
>> It is necessary for normal science to be uncritical. If all scientists
>> were critical of a theory and spent time trying to falsify it, no detailed
>> work would ever get done.
>>
>> “Normal Science, the activity in which most scientists inevitably spend
>> almost all of their time, is predicated on the assumption that the
>> scientific community knows what the world is like.
>>
>> Much of the success of the enterprise derives from the community’s
>> willingness to defend that assumption, if necessary, at considerable cost.
>>
>> Normal Science, for example, often suppresses fundamental novelties
>> because they are necessarily subversive of its basic commitments” (Kuhn,
>> 1996, p. 5).
>>
>> Phase 3: Crisis
>>
>> *This is where the paradigm shift occurs.*
>>
>> Anomalies become serious, and a crisis develops if the anomalies
>> undermine the basic assumptions of the paradigm and attempt to remove them
>> consistently fail.
>>
>> Under these circumstances, the rules for applying the paradigm become
>> relaxed. Ideas that challenge the existing paradigm are developed.
>>
>> In a crisis, there will be ‘extraordinary science’ where there will be
>> several competing theories.
>>
>> If the anomalies can be resolved, the crisis is over, and normal science
>> resumes. If not, there is a scientific revolution that involves a change of
>> paradigm.
>>
>> Phase 4: Revolution
>>
>> Eventually, a new paradigm will be established, but not because of any
>> logically compelling justification.
>>
>> The reasons for the choice of a paradigm are largely psychological and
>> sociological.
>>
>> The new paradigm better explains the observations and offers a model that
>> is closer to the objective, external reality.
>>
>> Different paradigms are held to be incommensurable — the new paradigm
>> cannot be proven or disproven by the rules of the old paradigm, and vice
>> versa.
>>
>> There is no natural measure or scale for ranking different paradigms.
>>
>> Critical Evaluation
>>
>> The enormous impact of Thomas Kuhn’s work can be measured in the changes
>> it brought about in the vocabulary of the philosophy of science: besides
>> “paradigm shift”, Kuhn raised the word “paradigm” itself from a term used
>> in certain forms of linguistics to its current
>>
>> broader meaning.
>>
>> The frequent use of the phrase “paradigm shift” has made scientists more
>> aware of and, in many cases, more receptive to paradigm changes, so Kuhn’s
>> analysis of the evolution of scientific views has, by itself, influenced
>> that evolution.
>>
>> For Kuhn, the choice of paradigm was sustained by, but not ultimately
>> determined by, logical processes. Kuhn believed that it represented the
>> consensus of the community of scientists. Acceptance or rejection of some
>> paradigm is, he argued, a social process as much as a logical process.
>>
>> This means Kuhn has been accused of being a relativist. Maybe all the
>> theories are equally valid? Why should we believe in today’s science when
>> it might be overturned in the future? Kuhn vigorously rejected this,
>> claiming that scientific revolutions have always led to new, more accurate
>> theories and represent true progress.
>>
>> Does science make progress through scientific revolutions? Are later
>> paradigms better than earlier ones? No, Kuhn suggests, they are just
>> different. The scientific revolutions that supplant one paradigm with
>> another do not take us closer to the truth about how the world is.
>>
>> Successive paradigms are incommensurable. Kuhn says that a later paradigm
>> may be a better instrument for solving puzzles than an earlier one. But if
>> each paradigm defines its own puzzles, what is a puzzle for one paradigm
>> may be no puzzle at all for another.
>>
>> So why is it progressive to replace one paradigm with another which
>> solves puzzles that the earlier paradigm does not even recognize? Kuhn used
>> his incommensurability thesis to disprove the view that paradigm shifts are
>> objective. *Truth is relative to the paradigm.*
>>
>> Science does not change its paradigm overnight. Younger scientists take a
>> new paradigm forward. As Kuhn put it, “a new scientific truth does not
>> triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but
>> rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up
>> that is familiar with it.”
>>
>> Thomas Kuhn showed contemporary philosophers could not ignore the history
>> of science and the social context in which science takes place. Science is
>> a product of the society in which it is practiced.
>>
>> Discussion Question: Is psychology a pre-science?
>>
>> Was there a cognitive revolution from behaviorism that changed
>> methodology and assumptions? Is cognitive psychology a new paradigm?
>> Hints: It’s still reductionist; input – the output still uses the
>> experimental method. {Thomas, K. (1962). The structure of scientific
>> revolutions}
>>
>> Challenges and Resistance to Paradigm Shifts:
>>
>> After dissecting the problems that plague the U.S. education system,
>> discussing the need for 21st century skills, and learning about the
>> situations in other countries, Think Tank panellists and participants
>> discussed big-picture paradigm changes that must occur to develop the
>> skills that are necessary for the United States’ growth and international
>> viability. Important discussion themes included:
>>
>> • Embracing the need for big, bold changes. Several panellists
>> emphasized that now is not the time for tinkering or for small, incremental
>> changes. America needs fundamental, systemic changes.
>>
>> • Creating an inspiring sense of purpose. Making big, bold changes
>> requires a sense of mission and purpose, and a clear vision. Helen Soulé,
>> the executive director of the Partnership for 21st Century Skills,
>> described her organization’s 21st Century Learning Exemplar Program which
>> involved looking for patterns among 25 schools or districts that have had
>> exemplary performance. All of these examples are grounded in a clear
>> purpose and vision.
>>
>> • Preparing leaders who can drive the changes that are needed. The
>> development and instillation of a sense of parhelion Soulé pose and driving
>> systemic changes don’t just happen by accident. Leaders with vision,
>> courage, and the ability to attract others must lead these changes. Leaders
>> are needed throughout the educational system, as teachers, principals, and
>> administrators, and as policymakers who have the will that is required to
>> prioritize 21st century skills.
>>
>> • Give much greater attention to teachers in efforts to reform
>> education. They should be protagonists of education transformation, and
>> need to receive the respect and preparation necessary to become empowered
>> professionals and leaders of the process of change.
>>
>> • Learning from other countries about teacher selection and
>> development. There is much to learn from Singapore and Finland in how they
>> select top candidates for teaching, screen them rigorously, assess on the
>> front end, invest heavily in professional development, and provide mentors,
>> tools, and resources for support. Teachers are treated as professionals and
>> are not narrowly measured based on test results. This is a very different
>> paradigm and is one factor producing better educational outcomes. The U.S.
>> should learn more about and consider adopting aspects of these paradigms.
>>
>> • Involving communities in broader educational efforts. Since
>> fewer than 20% of students’ waking hours are spent in school, improving
>> educational achievement requires thinking beyond and outside of schools.
>> This includes forming partnerships between schools and communities that
>> result in broad community involvement, and that create an overall culture
>> and climate of achievement. Students’ voices should be included as part of
>> this process. © Advanced Leadership Initiative 10Education for the 21st
>> Century: Executive Summary
>>
>> • Rethinking the paradigm of four-year colleges. Robert Schwartz,
>> Professor Emeritus at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, supports
>> the creation of educational standards, but believes these standards have
>> morphed into the belief that the real purpose of high school is to prepare
>> all kids for four-year colleges. This belief was fueled by economists who
>> foresaw a future with only two types of jobs: high-wage, high-skill jobs
>> and low-wage, low-skill jobs. Robert Schwartz • That forecast doesn’t
>> appear right. One result from this four-year college paradigm is that 40%
>> of recent college graduates are working at jobs that historically have not
>> required a four-year degree. 25–30% of all jobs are “middle skill” jobs,
>> requiring some form of post-secondary education. In fact, about half of all
>> STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) jobs are middle-skill
>> jobs, which currently pay slightly more than $50,000 per year. But the
>> educational system has not produced enough workers with middle skills,
>> resulting in a labour shortage. Other countries, such as Switzerland,
>> combine classroom and workplace learning to produce far more middle-skilled
>> workers. The economy in Switzerland is strong and the youth unemployment
>> rate is under 5%. This is an important area where the United States must
>> change its paradigm. Several states are now working to strengthen
>> vocational education programs to meet the demands in this high growth area.
>> Paul Reville © Advanced Leadership Initiative In his presentation
>> “Designing 21st Century Education Systems,” Professor Paul Reville sees the
>> incorporation of out-of-school learning as part of the overall educational
>> experience.
>>
>> Thus, ramifications involve a long process and by taking all to Aranya
>> past cannot be attained, where we had almost crossed the Atlantic. We need
>> structural alterations, that too without damaging the walls. That too is a
>> tall order.
>>
>> Hence, we need a small dent restructuring; feeding to grow Along
>> with nature; for that all those who teach must practice one with nature.
>> Pragmatism alone may show the way; living in a wooden structure in India
>> and asking the students not to destroy the forest may not help. What
>> applied to science and education discussed above pari-pasu applied to all
>> structures. And when we attempt one, there will be a need to change all. It
>> shall not become the experience of inserting the hand within Pandora's box.
>>
>> K Rajaram IRS 2624 3624
>>
>> On Sun, 2 Jun 2024 at 20:53, Markendeya Yeddanapudi <
>> markandeya101...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Mar*The Macro Paradigm
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Understanding needs a connecting conceptual or paradigmatic base.
>>> Without connecting to a previous experience or drilled conceptual
>>> definition, understanding cannot happen. In the case of the drilled and
>>> manufactured conceptual bases, understanding fails to be feeling.
>>>
>>> Once one built the connecting paradigmatic bases on the basis of
>>> experiencing the free and healthy nature as a part, component, limb, sprout
>>> and participant in and of nature. One’s own understanding became the
>>> understanding of nature also and the macro understanding of nature as a
>>> whole percolated into one. It was participation in the grand macro
>>> symbiosis of the Biosphere.Free,healthy and lush flora and fauna, did not
>>> stop with the spell bond, but actually participated in the body’s hormonal
>>> and activity functioning. One became a part of the Biosphere, the one
>>> single organism, Gaia or Bhoodevi. It was the grand flow of feelings and
>>> emotions in which every cell and from there every bacterium in the body
>>> participated in the hormonal communications. And when one exhaled, one
>>> exhaled the perception in smells and sounds which the other organisms
>>> inhaled and heard and created their own paradigmatic bases. Paradigms
>>> become part of the airs and winds. Nature becomes personal, self.And one
>>> does not need any publicity via media. One’s inhalation and exhalation
>>> automatically created the symbiotic publicity which definitely was received
>>> and interacted.
>>>
>>> Today thanks to the disaster of mechanization and the mechanical
>>> paradigms based on the feelings-less logics of machines, real understanding
>>> has become extinct. One has to labor with books and computers and a student
>>> feels relieved and free once the examinations were over. Often pitted by
>>> the stonewall of indifference one feels packed with tensions, as all
>>> outlets of expressions are blocked by the academic mandarins or peers or
>>> priests.
>>>
>>> The very participation of and with nature in understanding as the
>>> continuous hormonal communication is dead. One mistakes one’s blocked
>>> understanding, as big expertise, and one markets it for the monetized
>>> economic society. We put the tiny tot, even before it experiences real
>>> understanding in nature as nature; we put it in economic grinding mill
>>> called school. We do not even realize that we are robbing or maiming it of
>>> its basic faculty of macro understanding via feeling and experiencing
>>> nature. We actually block it’s breathe based perception by putting it in an
>>> AC classroom, which creates the stupid sense of superiority.
>>>
>>> We train it for economic activity, the euphemism for the continuous
>>> destruction of nature, your own macro body. If Hitler had won, there would
>>> have been PhDs in the final solution. But we find many PhDs in economics,
>>> even a Nobel to boot, which simply is based on the destruction of nature.
>>>
>>> We urgently need subjects on Macro perception and understanding and on
>>> the Psychology of the Biosphere and nature, the Macro Psychology.
>>>
>>> Births and deaths are part of nature in flow. Today the baby in the womb
>>> is terror stricken to leave its mother’s womb as birth. And we dread death.
>>> Fear is always the result of the unknown, which creates terrors.
>>>
>>> It is for the Universities to free all from the stranglehold of
>>> economics and create subjects like Macro Psychology. But we just ignore the
>>> fact that we are destroying nature and ourselves, and in the frenzy of the
>>> macro stupidity, we are mistaking the destruction as economic development.
>>>
>>> YM
>>>
>>> Chat GPT
>>>
>>> The text presents a profound critique of modern educational and economic
>>> paradigms, advocating for a fundamental shift towards a deeper,
>>> nature-connected understanding of life and learning. Here’s a breakdown of
>>> the core ideas and arguments:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ### Core Concepts
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1. **Connecting Paradigmatic Base**:
>>>
>>> - Understanding is rooted in connecting new knowledge to previous
>>> experiences or well-defined concepts.
>>>
>>> - Genuine understanding should emerge from direct experience with
>>> nature, not just from artificial, pre-fabricated concepts.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2. **Nature as a Paradigmatic Base**:
>>>
>>> - Immersion in nature leads to a holistic understanding of the world.
>>>
>>> - One’s understanding becomes intertwined with the broader ecosystem,
>>> creating a symbiotic relationship with the biosphere.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 3. **Mechanization and Loss of Real Understanding**:
>>>
>>> - Modern mechanization and the focus on logical, machine-like
>>> thinking have stripped away the deeper, emotional connection to
>>> understanding.
>>>
>>> - Education today emphasizes rote learning and economic utility over
>>> genuine comprehension and connection with nature.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 4. **Economic Society and Education**:
>>>
>>> - Schools often focus on economic productivity, overlooking the
>>> importance of experiential learning and nature-connected understanding.
>>>
>>> - This focus results in a disconnection from nature and fosters a
>>> sense of superiority and isolation in artificial environments like
>>> air-conditioned classrooms.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 5. **Nature and Psychological Health**:
>>>
>>> - Birth and death are natural processes, and fear of these is rooted
>>> in a lack of understanding.
>>>
>>> - A nature-connected paradigm can alleviate these fears, fostering a
>>> healthier psychological state.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 6. **Macro Psychology**:
>>>
>>> - There is a call for new academic disciplines such as Macro
>>> Psychology, which would focus on the holistic understanding of nature and
>>> the biosphere.
>>>
>>> - This discipline would promote a symbiotic relationship with nature,
>>> countering the destructive tendencies of current economic and educational
>>> practices.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ### Arguments and Implications
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1. **Symbiosis with Nature**:
>>>
>>> - Immersive experiences in nature facilitate a form of understanding
>>> that is deeply integrated with the natural world.
>>>
>>> - This understanding influences both mental and physical health,
>>> creating a harmonious existence with the environment.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2. **Critique of Modern Education**:
>>>
>>> - Modern education systems prioritize economic outcomes over holistic
>>> development.
>>>
>>> - The emphasis on standardized testing and economic productivity
>>> undermines natural, experiential learning.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 3. **Economic Destruction of Nature**:
>>>
>>> - Economic activities, often justified by mainstream educational
>>> achievements, lead to environmental degradation.
>>>
>>> - The text highlights the paradox of celebrating economic growth
>>> while it simultaneously destroys the natural world.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 4. **Need for Educational Reform**:
>>>
>>> - Universities and educational institutions should shift focus from
>>> purely economic metrics to fostering a deep understanding of and connection
>>> with nature.
>>>
>>> - Introducing subjects like Macro Psychology can promote a more
>>> sustainable and holistic approach to education and development.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ### Conclusion
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The text argues for a paradigm shift in how we approach understanding,
>>> education, and economic development. It emphasizes the need to reconnect
>>> with nature and develop a symbiotic relationship with the biosphere,
>>> suggesting that this will lead to healthier, more holistic understandings
>>> and ultimately, a more sustainable future. This shift requires rethinking
>>> educational curricula to include subjects that promote this connection and
>>> critique the destructive tendencies of current economic paradigms.
>>>
>>
>
> --
> *Mar*
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to thatha_patty+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZopSGNvoYJQgitQRDbPefza0tpDpQzf5VCE165hn%3DFeMiw%40mail.gmail.com.
