Editing Paradigm (section)

==Other uses==
The word ''paradigm'' is also still used to indicate a pattern or model or an outstandingly clear or typical example or [[archetype]].  The term is frequently used in this sense in the design professions.  Design Paradigms or [[archetype]]s comprise functional precedents for design solutions.  The best known references on design paradigms are ''Design Paradigms: A Sourcebook for Creative Visualization'', by Wake, and ''Design Paradigms'' by Petroski.

This term is also used in [[cybernetics]]. Here it means (in a very wide sense) a (conceptual) protoprogram for reducing the chaotic mass to some form of order.  Note the similarities to the concept of entropy in chemistry and physics.  A paradigm there would be a sort of prohibition to proceed with any action that would increase the total [[entropy]] of the system. To create a paradigm requires a [[closed system]] that accepts changes.  Thus a paradigm can only apply to a system that is not in its final stage.

Beyond its use in the physical and social sciences, Kuhn's paradigm concept has been analysed in relation to its applicability in identifying 'paradigms' with respect to worldviews at specific points in history. One example is Matthew Edward Harris' book ''The Notion of Papal Monarchy in the Thirteenth Century: The Idea of Paradigm in Church History''.<ref>{{cite book|last=Harris|first=Matthew|title=The notion of papal monarchy in the thirteenth century : the idea of paradigm in church history|year=2010|publisher=[[Edwin Mellen Press]]|location=[[Lewiston, New York]]|isbn=978-0-7734-1441-9|pages=160}}</ref> Harris stresses the primarily sociological importance of paradigms, pointing towards Kuhn's second edition of ''The Structure of Scientific Revolutions''. Although obedience to popes such as [[Pope Innocent III|Innocent III]] and [[Boniface VIII]] was widespread, even written testimony from the time showing loyalty to the pope does not demonstrate that the writer had the same worldview as the Church, and therefore pope, at the centre. The difference between paradigms in the physical sciences and in historical organisations such as the Church is that the former, unlike the latter, requires technical expertise rather than repeating statements. In other words, after scientific training through what Kuhn calls '[[exemplars (Kuhn)|exemplars]]', one could not genuinely believe that, to take a trivial example, [[the earth is flat]], whereas thinkers such as [[Giles of Rome]] in the thirteenth century wrote in favour of the pope, then could easily write similarly glowing things about the king. A writer such as Giles would have wanted a good job from the pope; he was a papal publicist. However, Harris writes that 'scientific group membership is not concerned with desire, emotions, gain, loss and any idealistic notions concerning the nature and destiny of humankind...but simply to do with aptitude, explanation, [and] cold description of the facts of the world and the universe from within a paradigm'.<ref>{{cite book|last=Harris|first=Matthew|title=The notion of papal monarchy in the thirteenth century : the idea of paradigm in church history|year=2010|publisher=[[Edwin Mellen Press]]|location=[[Lewiston, New York]]|isbn=978-0-7734-1441-9|page=118}}</ref>