4.1 Lesson-1: Levels of Paradigm

A framework we call Levels of Paradigm is one of the best ways to recognize the differences between various economic paradigms. We refer to a paradigm as a cognitive framework that contains the fundamental presuppositions, modes of thought, and technique that are widely shared among group members. Individuals are unable to coexist in numerous paradigms at once while maintaining coherence for this reason. It is understandable why so many individuals and organizations are opposed to adopting a new paradigm because doing so would mean letting go of too many beliefs they have about what is real, comfortable, and desirable. But, once a paradigm introduces a fresh, internally consistent method of understanding reality, it invariably replaces the prior one. More dissonance, debility, and even violent conflicts, both internally and externally, ensue from the resisters’ attempts to incorporate the new language and concepts into their preexisting conception of reality.

It’s not uncommon for people to cling to familiar approaches to worldview, despite the fact that doing so makes it harder for them to confront and deal with reality. Hence, we want to make it very obvious that, in our opinion, shifting one’s paradigm of thought is not just desirable or advantageous but also vitally necessary at this point in history.

The framework that follows outlines a collection of paradigms that are understandable and recognisable and frequently influence current dialogue and thought. It also exemplifies the idea that surpassing one’s paradigm comes from a focused attempt to advance. Work at the top level produces the most power and leverage since each level of a paradigm symbolizes an expansion of knowing beyond the paradigms that came before it.

With the aid of a framework like this, people and organizations can identify the paradigms that are guiding their choices and identify any inconsistencies between their intentions and actions. They may finally let go of the old paradigms and truly embrace the new thanks to this.

Each successive level in a hierarchy has a different capacity for handling complexity and connecting systems than the level below it. When someone approaches work from a lower paradigm, they are constrained in what potential can be identified and explored as well as the types of value that may be produced. Without allowing go of the outdated paradigm, it is simply not feasible to see the values maintained at a higher level. In light of this approach, the regenerate life level is the most complete, systematic, and leveraged venue to engage on economic practice or policy.

It’s crucial to realize that this framework doesn’t really represent activity or doing levels. This use of it can be dangerous since it leads one to believe that different types of activities are both required and beneficial. This hides the reality that paradigms are about ment, not activity. People’s perceptions of information, their ability to make sense of it, and the potential outcomes they are able to imagine are all influenced by their paradigms. This implies that according to the stage of paradigm through which it is engaged, the identical subject or activity will appear entirely different. The necessity to rigorously adopt a fresh approach to familiar tasks and routines and the requirement to unlearn and give up cognitive patterns that bind one to the old paradigm are two of the largest obstacles to adopting a new paradigm.