Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!iuvax!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!osiris.cso.uiuc.edu!goldfain
From: goldfain@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Subject: Re: PARADIGM FLAME
Message-ID: <12100005@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: Mon, 2-Nov-87 03:16:00 EST
Article-I.D.: osiris.12100005
Posted: Mon Nov  2 03:16:00 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Nov-87 12:11:16 EST
References: <236@titn.TITN>
Lines: 35
Nf-ID: #R:titn.TITN:236:osiris.cso.uiuc.edu:12100005:000:2088
Nf-From: osiris.cso.uiuc.edu!goldfain    Nov  2 02:16:00 1987


Re: Jordan Bortz' objection to the (mis)usage of "paradigm" ---

I have Thomas Kuhn's  _The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions_ (2nd ed.)
in front of me.

     He noted that certain experiments or works in science stood out above the
rest, and had tremendous impact, often changing the way science was carried on
by many.  These works were so outstanding, that  they became the  ones studied
by subsequent students and many other experiments would  be designed or essays
would  be written just  to further  detail the issues  they   raised.   (After
careful  explanation, see page  viii in  the Preface and  page  10 in the main
essay) He calls them "paradigms" and rightly so.   This usage of "paradigm" to
mean "example", is not disputed by any of the previous postings in this chain.
But he went on to show how a set of  such exemplars, such  model works, formed
almost a  world view  for those who  followed in   their wake.  Thus  examples
produced "ways of working/thinking".

     I believe that Kuhn's claim is correct, at least  in general.  Thus it is
not a large move to  go from "example",  to  "methodology".   I have even  had
professors use the term  "paradigm"  consistently in lectures to  refer to the
world-views  of a scientific  community,   totally setting the "landmark work"
aside.   When discussing programming  languages/environments, this shifting of
the  word "paradigm" to  mean "methodology",  is right in  the mainstream of a
small tradition.  You will find this new usage in many departments on campuses
all over the nation.  I think  it is too late to  stop it, though as Mr. Bortz
points out, this is not in the established dictionaries.

     In  a way, Kuhn  has produced his own small  paradigm!  If Mr.   Bortz is
lucky, this usage of  the  word will fade, perhaps in  his lifetime.  If he is
not lucky, it will take hold and become the primary meaning of the  word, long
after we have all gone to the great network in the sky.

                                Mark Goldfain
                                University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign