|Designed to be tested (scientific), or cannot be tested/disproved (metaphysical)||Assumed but not tested. (May become testable if the context is enlarged, or may be untestable.)|
|Models are constructed for usefulness, and many alternatives may be used by the same person for different applications.||Models are constructed within a paradigm's "landscape," and use a similar symbol structure.|
|Although a model may become commonly used, it can be replaced with "improvements" when needed or new understanding is achieved.||When a paradigm becomes "subconscious" it begins to define the "reality" of personal experience, and becomes more difficult to replace.|
|We often are very pleased to see new innovations, and anticipate the prospects of new model improvements with pleasure.||We may become blind to many of our observations when they do not fit our expectations, and misperceive stability and absolutes as "reality."|
|If we CANNOT make a change to an entirely new and improved model, we are resentful and protest loudly.||If we MUST change a paradigm that has defined our "reality" it is very difficult, and causes high anxiety, confusion, anger and depression.|
|A certain model may become a strongly cherished symbol, and may be retained with nostalgia, but will not be confused with reality.||One may fight for a paradigm, even give one's life for it if the interpretation of reality is dear, and defines one's self and self-value.|
|Use of models creates a jargon, which is intended to have clear definitions that can be used to explain and compare the terms.||A language may be built upon a certain paradigm (world view), and make it difficult to communicate when the world view is changed.|
|A model may reflect a skill, but not an awareness.||A paradigm may be associated with a "consciousness" level (perception of relationships and interconnections).|
|Models may change, but they remain within the same paradigm.||Paradigms may become models, but a re-definition of the scale, scope, universe usually is required.|
|Difficult problems highlight the needed changes in the models. Businesses function within a common paradigm. New models are "marketable."||Many "insoluble problems" have no solution until the paradigm is changed. Einstein said, "Few real problems can be solved with the same consciousness from which they arose." (The discussion of "sustainability" has no solution within our prevailing paradigm!)|
The paradigm does not necessarily describe reality, and at best only describes one aspect of reality. The paradigm establishes limits. Within your frame of reference you can achieve improvements. The tower could become more prominent if lighted orange, OR it could become more efficient if the windows were thermal glass, OR it could be surrounded by a moat. Some have said it should be laid on it's side and have only entrances without halls and stairs -- or others say it should be replaced entirely and the space used for a sports complex. (If the campus were located elsewhere where real estate values are lower the university could get more money for nonacademic purposes and the cost of academic functions would be lower.) Try to think of more uses, each "better" under it's individual paradigm. Notice that by changing the "rules" embedded in a paradigm, one reasonable interpretation is strikingly unreasonable under other "rules." The rules define different "realities" defined by different paradigms.
In the map metaphor, both our host and ourselves assumed the map was correct. That was a paradigm we shared. The problem was insoluble, until we could shift our paradigm and include the possibility of an incorrect map along with correct maps.
Back to Bio 325W HomePage
Maintained by Dick Richardson
Last updated 11/06/03