A paradigm is "a world view, a way of ordering and simplifying the perceptual world's stunning complexity by making certain fundamental assumptions about the nature of the universe, of the individual, and of society. Paradigms are normative; they determine what the practitioner views as important and unimportant, reasonable and unreasonable, legitimate and illegitimate, possible and impossible, and what to attend to and what to ignore. In learning a paradigm, theory, method, and standards are acquired together, typically in an inextricable mixture. Moreover, through the theories they embody, paradigms prove to be constitutive of all normal scientific activity, including underlying assumptions made, problem definition, areas of investigation, questions posed and, particularly, data interpretation, conclusions drawn and policy recommendations made at the end of the research process (Kuhn, 1970). Thus all theories as well as the methods generated by them are, ultimately, paradigm based."

Source: Ratcliffe, J. W. (1983). Notions of Validity in Qualitative Research Methodology. Science Communication, 5(2), 147-167. doi: 10.1177/107554708300500201

This is also my question.

Interested to follow the discussion.

Certainly not.. A paradigm is not a process... -:)

A paradigm is "a world view, a way of ordering and simplifying the perceptual world's stunning complexity by making certain fundamental assumptions about the nature of the universe, of the individual, and of society. Paradigms are normative; they determine what the practitioner views as important and unimportant, reasonable and unreasonable, legitimate and illegitimate, possible and impossible, and what to attend to and what to ignore. In learning a paradigm, theory, method, and standards are acquired together, typically in an inextricable mixture. Moreover, through the theories they embody, paradigms prove to be constitutive of all normal scientific activity, including underlying assumptions made, problem definition, areas of investigation, questions posed and, particularly, data interpretation, conclusions drawn and policy recommendations made at the end of the research process (Kuhn, 1970). Thus all theories as well as the methods generated by them are, ultimately, paradigm based."

Source: Ratcliffe, J. W. (1983). Notions of Validity in Qualitative Research Methodology. Science Communication, 5(2), 147-167. doi: 10.1177/107554708300500201

1.you can call paradigm as a platform where from you see any action in a specific view,so every paradigm has a different view from each other.

2. theory is a set of statement which has to connect the two phenomenaz with each other, A good theory is explanatory and Predictive.

May be paradigm is a specific way of looking into things, issues and social reality as well as dynamics but theory is more of rigid kind of frame which is not flexible and is more precise.

A paradigm is a plan or a menu a solid view but with many factors. Where a theory is the hypothesis-something we all should know.

Theory is defined as a “system of concepts and statements, models, or principles, which, in concert, make the empirical world more intelligible” (Krimsky S and Golding D 1992:6). Paradigms are views or overall arching ideas or beliefs that a group of people may have to understand the theories. Hope that helps!

Bryan

Theory is verified hypothesis. Paradigm is a viewed by positive approach i.e thinks as they are.( it is a process)

Dr.D.KUMAR Jamal Mohamed college, Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu.

Paradigm is a 'reading/sight glasses' which differs from person to person while theory is the 'torch light' that is same for every one. Or better still, finger-prints vs palm. Everybody has predictable hand with plam but not same with finger-prints. While paradigm is yours, theory belongs to all. These are elementary ways to start assuming the differences between paradigm and theory.

Thomas Kuhn suggested that a paradigm defines “the practices that define a scientific discipline at certain point in time.”

Alternatively, it could be phrased as the general "world view" or "state of the art" of an area of research. In psyological terms this would be, in a very wooly definition, our current understanding of how mind and brain functions relate to our behaviour.

A theory is a testable hypothesis within a paradigm. So, in psychology, theories of neurochemical influences canbe tested.

A paradigm is more general than a theory but narrower and more focused than a worldview.

There are many different definitions of paradigm and theory, and I will only present here some of them with which I mainly agree.

First Kuhn (1962) used the term paradigm to describe normal science. However Masterman (1970) documented twenty-one different meanings of the term “paradigm” in Kuhn’s work , but Kuhn himself eventually distinguished between two principal meanings: “On the one hand, it stands for the entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques and so on shared by the members of a given community. On the other, it denotes one sort of element in that constellation, the concrete puzzle-solutions which, employed as models or as examples, can replace explicit rules as a basis for the solution of the remaining puzzles of normal science” (Kuhn, 1970). The notion that we advance here differs slightly from those formulated by Kuhn. It actually addresses the following question: how do we move from experienced phenomena to the scientific object as defined by Gilles-Gaston Granger (1994)? For this philosopher, “the complex life experience grasped in the experience of sensitive things has become the object of a mechanics and a physics, for example, when the idea was conceived of reducing it to an abstract model, initially comprising only spatiality, time, and ‘resistance’ to motion.” And he recognizes that this object does not benefit at the outset from an explicit and general definition of its content. For instance, sciences such as physics and biology perform successive elaborations of their objects, as illustrated by the transition from Newton’s physics to Einstein’s general relativity. Likewise, demography has spelled out its object by means of successive paradigms, which specified various kinds of relationships between the observed phenomena and the scientific object (Courgeau and Franck, 2007).

Boudon (1970)distinguished between "theories in the strict meaning of the term" and paradigms or "theories in the broad meaning of the term". The strict meaning of theory corresponds to the notion of a hyothetically deductive system and is more resricted than the large one. I mainly agree with this distinction.

If I understood well, paradigm is somekind of framework in which theories are developed. But the descritpions of paradigm remain vague. Is a paradigm (1) a minimum set of well defined terms, and (2) a minimum set of assumptions that are considered as true, (3) description about how to look at a specific object or phenomenon.

In other words, in the huge amount of literature produced in a specific field of research, how do I have to define the paradigm used by that community?

Dear Olivier,

For me a paradigm corresponds to your point (3): description about how to look at a specific object or phenomenon. It is the first point of the method proposed by Robert Franck (2002): (1) Beginning with the systematic observation of certain properties of a given social system. An axiom corresponds to your point (2): a minimum set of assumptions that are considered as true. It is the second point of the method proposed by Franck: (2) we infer the formal (conceptual) structure which is implied in these properties. This formal (conceptual) model will then guide us to discover the factors operative within the social mechanism. This is the point (3) of his method. It corresponds, may be less precisely, with your point (1): a minimum set of well defined terms. However the factors operative within a social mechanism are to be given with well defined terms. The last point is (4): the mechanism, once identified, either confirms the advanced formal structure, or indicates that we need to revise it.

Do you agree with such definitions?

With my best regards,

Daniel

Reference:

Robert Franck, Ed, (2002): The explanatory power of models, Kluwer Academic Publisher.

Can we say that paradigm has something to do with consensus in an open system while a theory is closed and less flexible. Also the word 'true' as number 2 of Olivier Scholm, how can this controlled?

I just read the book of Kuhn. It is interesting to note that he wrote e complete book about paradigma without actually defining this concept. By reading between the lines he means the following (I think):

1. A set of concepts essential for the research community has to be defined

2. A general theory describes the principles of the research area and the scientific communinity BELIEVES this theory is correct. It can be compared with a axioma's in mathematics

3. The scientific community solves detailed and/ord hidden problems by using the general theory or by refining that theory

Paradigm is a set of assumptions, concepts, values and practices that constitutes ways of viewing reality for the community that shares them, especially in an intellectual discipline (Gokturk 2004).  What this definition portrays that researcher’s assumptions, developed insights through theories constitute ways of viewing knowledge. In other words paradigm help the researcher in identifying ways empirical knowledge can be revealed based on his/her epistemology and the perceive existent truth

A Flamish poet, Johan Daisne said: theory kills the poetry.

theory is a part of paradigm and paradigm is process of theory building