Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!m.cs.uiuc.edu!liberte
From: liberte@m.cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: "Paradigm" (Re: OOP in C)
Message-ID: <77500021@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: 16 Dec 89 01:38:52 GMT
References: <11294@goofy.megatest.UUCP>
Lines: 41
Nf-ID: #R:goofy.megatest.UUCP:11294:m.cs.uiuc.edu:77500021:000:2070
Nf-From: m.cs.uiuc.edu!liberte    Dec 15 12:40:00 1989


I think there is a way to understand the phrase "object-oriented
paradigm" in the context of the "original" meaning of "paradigm". 
One interpretation obviously has problems:

> /* Written 10:41 pm  Dec 14, 1989 by djones@megatest.UUCP in m.cs.uiuc.edu:comp.object */
> From article <77500020@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, by render@m.cs.uiuc.edu:
> > 	paradigm:  1. model, pattern.  (according to Merriam-Webster)
> 
> ... 'esp: an outstandingly clear or typical example
> or archetype.' An "object-oriented paradigm" would be a program which was
> written so expertly as to be an exemplary model for other programs of that
> sort, or one which was so typical of object-oriented programs
> as to serve as a definitive example. But in any case, it is *a program*,
> or a model of *a program*.  It is not a methodology. It is not a moral
> or ethical system. It is not a World View.

However, consider object-oriented *methodology* as one example of possible
methodologies.  If object-oriented methodology is, in fact, a particularly
clear example of possible methodologies, then it is a methodology
paradigm.  It might more properly be called the "object-oriented
methodology paradigm".  Why was "methodology" dropped?  Perhaps because
the term "object-oriented" absorbed the concept of "methodology".
I dont think it is because "paradigm" absorbed "methodology".

The noun "paradigm" might be appended to other adjectives (derived
from nouns, e.g., sailboat transportation paradigm) when the exemplary
relationship between the noun and the more abstract class that it
is a member of (e.g., modes of transportation) is being emphasized.
Might one also say "sailboat paradigm" to mean the transportation
paradigm and not some particular sailboat?  Here, "paradigm" is certainly
not absorbing the concept of "transportation".

So, I would say that the meaning of "paradigm" is not being changed,
but rather the usage.  The class that a thing is a paradigm of is
not stated, but implied by context.

Dan LaLiberte
uiucdcs!liberte
liberte@cs.uiuc.edu
liberte%a.cs.uiuc.edu@uiucvmd.bitnet