Paradigm Shift

Posted by Alan Taylor on 10 May 2010 | 3 Comments

Tags: Paradigm, Consciousness, Intuition

Hi Everyone,

I have only recently joined the network. I am an ex-Chemical Physics academic. Those of you who are familiar with psychometric testing will spot the “infj” on my email address. My personality type then is often called “The Mystic”. Here is an essay I wrote on paradigms.

Best wishes,

Alan

--------

Paradigm Shift

 

I am going to try to express a little on the nature of how working within a paradigm prevents true expansion of understanding; this will be difficult, nevertheless I am going to have a go.

First though let's turn to Wikipedia for advice on paradigm.

The word paradigm (pronounced /pærədaɪm/, from Greek: παράδειγμα paradeigma meaning pattern, from Greek: paradeiknunai meaning to compare, composite from para- and the verb deiknunai "to show"), has been used in linguistics and science to describe distinct concepts.

Until the 1960s, the word was specific to grammar: the 1900 Merriam-Webster dictionary defines its technical use only in the context of grammar or, in rhetoric, as a term for an illustrative parable or fable. In linguistics, Ferdinand de Saussure used paradigm to refer to a class of elements with similarities.

From the 1960s onward, the word has referred to thought pattern in any scientific discipline or other epistemological context. The Merriam-Webster Online dictionary defines this usage as "a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated; broadly : a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind."[1]

The article continues and is worth a read.


This brief "dip" into Wiki shows that even the word paradigm itself is constrained by definition and usage, with various groupings claiming their own understanding and deployment of the word.

In a sense then even the concept of paradigm is reductionist in its approach. And working entirely from within a paradigm is inhibitory of further development. Such provides the only yard stick for measure against some international or national agreed measure.

Let us imagine then, that a travelling galactic biologist arrived on this planet and began a study of anthropology; untrammelled by what we humans think anthropology is; this alien would not be caught up with the comparative anthropology or social science which we have developed and might, should he choose, approach things with an open mind. That is if he even had such a thing as mind.

Being a wise alien, he might acknowledge that his interpretation would be limited by his capacities to perceive, his cognitive apparatus and his own experience of living in a different world. Having been able to travel through the vast tracts of space before his arrival, it is likely that his biochemistry, even if he had such a thing, would be very different from our own; IF and it is a big IF our current comprehension of travel through space and time within the context of matter has any validity.

If you are alert, you can see I am already beginning to explain the nature of this putative alien from within my own paradigm as a carnate (in meat) human being, in which it is almost impossible to conceive of a type of life which differs radically from my own; which is one concerned with physical plane function.

What if this being then had a being-ness of life that does not require physical plane function?

It is easy enough to demonstrate that the I or the IT which indwells is not encompassed by the form nor the thoughts themselves. The totality is more than the sum of the parts.

Could then we be a little more bold?

This raises some more questions and quays for a new journey, perhaps away from the crowded shores and cross channel ferries of human to-ing and fro-ing.

How can we compare anything with the absolute, the void, the infinite and the ineffable? How can we compare the known with the unknowable?

We can't. It is not possible.

The search for extra-terrestrial life works at using our modes of communication and searches for hydrate life forms perhaps based upon hydrogen, oxygen, carbon and nitrogen, with perhaps a few other elements added in for seasoning. So that search is also based upon our carnate paradigm.

It does not search for LIFE!

I have just watched "Happy Feet" with my daughter; and in that the penguins cannot understand why the humans cannot understand simple penguin language; it confuses them.

What I am getting at is that paradigm has inherent in it creed and belief; irrespective of how rigorous the method of study and experiment. No matter what the rationalists say; rationalism itself is a creed and a belief; even a doctrine or perhaps dogma. It insists that rationalism is the only way to approach things....Which even within that framework is inconsistent and prejudicial. Rationalism is also comparative; yet if one is being rational about this then the basis set must be incomplete because history demonstrates that thought and knowledge evolve. As such absolutism and surety cannot be assumed unless one is doing a perceptual trick of pushing stuff under the carpet.

In a sense paradigm is a "fancy" word for being prejudiced either individually or collectively. Those that feel comfortable in its parlance can then wink knowingly at each other at the cocktail party and hold court about how the world needs a "Paradigm Shift", going all mysterious and other worldly if you try to pin them down as to what exactly they mean. They belong to the club; they "understand" what it means and you do not have the intellectual capacity to breathe the lofty air "up there".

The paradigm shift is that the word should be struck from the language because it can be used as a justification for exclusion, stagnation and prejudice.

In other people's opinion I have quite a high intellectual capacity; yet it has not served me well in coming to peace with, nor understanding the meaning or purpose of life. I remember well that it is my assumed understanding which nearly always gets in the way.

That is why the Zen axiom of "Simply go straight. Use don't know mind!", is so very helpful.

Let me be specific, intellectualism is not true knowledge and it will not serve well in situations of survival nor in matters of the spirit.

If one is trying to synthesize concrete thought with a sense of spirituality; then perhaps it might be wise to at least begin by acknowledging the tool set designed and evolved to explain and predict the properties of matter (science), might be flawed and not suited for spiritual discovery. The tool set is not appropriate for purpose. Imagine then the analogy of trying to use a tooth brush to create a fine work of art portraiture using oil paint and you can easily imagine the analogy developing.

 

I have an EEG machine at home and whilst during meditation I can lower the electrical activity of the brain, such that there is precious little, it does not reveal anything to me about the quality or state of consciousness I attain. It simply says that my synapses aren’t firing quite as much as when I am thinking.

The tool set for spiritual evolution is based upon qualities, feeling, moods; inference, intuition and knowings. These are fine and delicate, made of the softest fibres wound together into a brush by an exquisite Craftsman; so that you can dip into the palette of existence for the very creation of your own masterpiece of living. These capacities are as yet underdeveloped down the health club and on the infernal rowing machine or jog track of life.

So the shift I am advocating is towards developing a new tool set, fit for purpose for the revelation of hidden depths. If one listens to esoteric thought then the destiny of humanity as a race, is towards the Buddhic plane, where intuition is the prime flavour which the Divine Chef has woven into His elaborate and highly tasty menu.

Intellect soon now, will have served its purpose and as such must perforce pass. Intuition is the nascent and it must be fed and watered; given a few drops of "Miracle Grow" from time to time. We need to learn to trust this faculty. Hence to foray out from the South Pole with "Happy Feet" into the less defined and constrained experience of living as opposed to existence.