Pranam You always remain noble by understating your power; I am only expressing for readers to fly higher as you have already kept us in space above gravity. KR IRS 28722
On Thu, 28 Jul 2022 at 14:49, Markendeya Yeddanapudi < [email protected]> wrote: > Rajaram Sir, > Thank you very much for raising the standard of my writeup with your great > learning.My own learning is very little,but you invariably take my writeu > to peak High Brow.How xI wish that I deserve the elevation. > YM > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 1:20 PM Rajaram Krishnamurthy < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Pranam >> >> 1 The terms paradigm and theory are often used interchangeably in >> social science, although social scientists do not always agree whether >> these are identical or distinct concepts *paradigm* as a way of >> viewing the world (or “analytic lens” akin to a set of glasses) and a >> framework from which to understand the human experience-as defined. It can >> be difficult to fully grasp the idea of paradigmatic assumptions because we >> are very ingrained in our own, personal everyday way of thinking. For >> example, let’s look at people’s views on abortion. To some, abortion is a >> medical procedure that should be undertaken at the discretion of each >> individual woman. To others, abortion is murder and members of society >> should collectively have the right to decide when, if at all, abortion >> should be undertaken. Chances are, if you have an opinion about this topic, >> you are pretty certain about the veracity of your perspective. Then again, >> the person who sits next to you in class may have a very different opinion >> and yet be equally confident about the truth of their perspective. Who is >> correct? >> >> 2 You are each operating under a set of assumptions about the way the >> world works, or the way you believe the world should work. Perhaps your >> assumptions come from your political perspective, which helps shape your >> view on a variety of social issues, or perhaps your assumptions are >> based on what you learned from your parents or in religion around. In >> any case, there is a paradigm that shapes your stance on the issue. >> Those paradigms are a set of assumptions. These beliefs and assumptions >> influence how we think about any aspect of the issue*. Paradigms are a >> way of framing what we know, what we can know, and how we can know it*. >> Positivism is the first paradigm we will consider, as it is likely the >> first that comes to mind when thinking about science. *Positivism* is >> guided by the principles of objectivity, “knowability,” and deductive >> logic. Deductive logic is discussed in more detail in next section of this >> chapter. The positivist framework operates from the assumption that society >> can and should be studied empirically and scientifically. Positivism also >> calls for a value-free science, one in which researchers aim to abandon >> their biases and values in a quest for objective, empirical, and knowable >> truth. >> >> 3 Another predominant paradigm in social work is *social >> constructionism*. While positivists seek “the truth,” the social >> constructionist framework posits that “truth” varies. Truth is different >> based on who you ask, and people change their definitions of truth { as >> in this group a few did and others watched over ineffectively} all the >> time based on their interactions with other people. *According to this >> paradigm, we create reality through our interactions and the >> interpretations that we have of our interactions, as opposed to the >> existence of an objective reality. * So, what is the “truth” of the >> middle finger or thumbs up? It depends on the gesture’s intended meaning, >> the gesture’s interpretation, and the social context in which it occurs. ( >> for esy understanding of a paradigm) . In other words, the meanings that we >> construct have power beyond the individual people who create them. >> >> 4 A third paradigm is the *critical* paradigm. At its core, the >> critical paradigm is focused on power, inequality, and social change. >> Unlike the positivist paradigm, the critical paradigm posits that social >> science can never be truly objective or value-free. Further, this >> paradigm operates from the perspective that scientific investigation should >> be conducted with the express goal of social change in mind. The critical >> paradigm not only studies power imbalances but also seeks to change them. >> >> 5 Finally, *postmodernism* is a paradigm that challenges almost every >> way of knowing that many social scientists take for granted . While >> positivists claim that there is an objective, knowable truth, >> postmodernists would say that there is not. While social constructionists >> may argue that truth is in the eye of the beholder(s), postmodernists may >> claim that we can never know such truth. This is because postmodernists >> believe that researchers stamp their own truth on the investigation when >> studying and reporting on others’ truths. Finally, while the critical >> paradigm may argue that power, inequality, and change shape reality and >> truth, a postmodernist may ask whose power, inequality, change, reality, >> and truth are in question. Much like paradigms, theories provide a way to >> look at the world and understand human interaction. Paradigms are grounded >> in over-arching, general assumptions about the world, whereas theories >> describe more specific phenomena. They help us answer the “why” and “how” >> questions we often have about the patterns we observe in social life. While >> paradigms may point us in a particular direction with respect to our “why” >> questions, theories more specifically map out the explanation, or the >> “how,” behind the “why.” >> 6 Sanskrit has many words for paradigm, but the best is Vivaraṇa ( >> विवरण).—1) Displaying, expressing, unfolding, opening.; 2) Exposing, >> laying bare or open.; 3) Exposition, explanation, gloss, comment, >> interpretation.; 4) Describing, description. Thye word describes as >> facts variables as law states that each case is different. Hence Paradigm >> is not the truth. It is a derivation from certain known facts. KR IRS >> 28722 >> >> On Thu, 28 Jul 2022 at 07:14, Markendeya Yeddanapudi < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Mar**The Emergence and Shift of Paradigmatic Bases* >>> >>> >>> >>> Paradigm is the connecting conceptual base of understanding. Unless one >>> connects to a concept or paradigm developed in one’s mind one cannot >>> understand. Understanding actually was the growth of concepts or basic >>> paradigms, the scope continuously increasing and developing new branches >>> and connections and extensions. >>> >>> But once understanding was not entangled and bound to concepts and >>> paradigms. Every organism, perceived as part and participant of nature, and >>> understanding consisted of breathing, smelling, perceiving, acting, >>> interacting and in harmonizing as reflex action filled life. In fact one’s >>> mind did not find opportunity to suspend the breathe based perception to do >>> analysis and then dialysis. One participated in nature as nature, and one >>> could not separate from nature to carry on the divorced observation and >>> private perception. Nature as God was everywhere, and God created >>> Revelations as continuous flashes of enlightenment. One lived as an organic >>> part and participant of nature. >>> >>> With the emergence of the Neo Cortex, the Human organism gradually >>> deviated from being a part of the macro perception of the Biosphere as a >>> whole. Understanding changed from feeling to detached observation for >>> noting and feeling became the sin called bias. >>> >>> Observation for perception needed the connecting conceptual base, called >>> paradigm. The very smell messages from nature were ignored and the human >>> struggled to just connect phenomena to the established paradigm in the >>> mind. The basic apparatus of perception, through breathing, smelling, >>> sensing and perceiving in and as nature has been removed to pave way for >>> the scientific or Cartesian mathematical reduction. >>> >>> Nature no longer was a part and participant in perception. In fact the >>> indifferent and insensitive destruction of nature has become the unbiased >>> and detached scientific noting by the mind without feeling. The very thrill >>> of revelation from nature has been killed by technology. The innate art in >>> one’s life as a part and participant in and as nature vanished. >>> >>> Today the scientific detachment has taken us to the very abandonment of >>> perception. We no longer perceive, but only note what the computers tell. >>> We do not even need concepts and the paradigmatic bases. This is the era of >>> death of paradigms and rule by computers. >>> >>> We have a machine perform the work of every organ, and we are making our >>> organs redundant. In this frenzy to make our Biology redundant, the mind >>> too is becoming dysfunctional. >>> >>> Once when one walked in free, thick and lush nature one perceived along >>> with every organism of the Biosphere breathing the smell messages and >>> exhaling smell responses. In that ‘Kavi Sammelan Every organism was a >>> participant. >>> >>> This is the era of technology or the techno logic or the logic of the >>> machine.AI is taking over.AI does not need paradigms. It needs only the >>> synchronization of engineering. >>> >>> YM >>> >> > > -- > *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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZor0x_oK%2BTn3Zyd3W3%3DefcMZ%3DhMdVh7L5d-SGi3sfmgmVw%40mail.gmail.com.
