Paradigm Shift for the USA

Foundation for Better Government

October 10, 2012.

Paradigm Shift for the USA

By T.S. Khanna, October 10, 2012.

In every society, there is a body of beliefs, convictions, sentiments, accepted principles, and firmly rooted prejudices, which, taken together, provide a framework of public thought process.  This framework is based on certain assumptions, true or false, tested or untested, that are believed by the society to be true with such confidence that they do not appear to bear the character of assumptions.

 This dominant theoretical framework controlling and guiding the public thought process, judgment, behavior, as well as perception of observations and life’s experiences is the paradigm of the society.

When human logic is not available to adopt certain values for which there is a felt need and the prevailing mental intensity in public, those values are adopted by invoking the authority of God.  Since communication with God is only through feelings, religious leaders can justify and sanctify any set of values, without any logical explanation, by invoking the authority of God.

Most societies around the world were established with paradigms based on religions, emphasizing all powerful God as the Supreme Arbitrator, religious leaders as the agents of God, and unquestioning faith in religious teachings as the unchallengeable, ultimate source of knowledge.  Such paradigms concentrated power in religious institutions; restricting the growth of knowledge with emphasis on obedience in an hierarchical manner.

The US society was founded in 1776 by adopting a “political religion” defined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.  The Founders created a new form of government which had no parallel; in James Madison’s words, “…no model on the face of the earth”. 

By invoking the authority of God, Declaration of Independence announced values: (a) all men are created equal, and, (b) all men have certain inalienable Rights (the Bill of Rights). These values have been the dominant basis of the US society’s paradigm.  This paradigm dispersed power among many as opposed to religious paradigms concentrating power in a few.

At the time of their adoption, the values seem to reflect the “ultimate truth”.  However, with the passage of time and new experiences “new truths” are revealed.  But for the keen observations and sacrifices of Copernicus/Galileo, our planet would still be flat and the center of the Universe.  

However, the values once adopted and practiced for some time, come to be regarded as axiomatic and hard to change, even when they are harmful or anti-progressive for the society.  Now the fast changing times are demanding flexibility in values to meet the new challenges.  But the power structures of the societies do not have the flexibility feature for a smooth paradigm shift.

 There seem to be six stages for a forced paradigm shift:

1. Some anomalous findings are noted but cannot be explained away in terms of the prevailing paradigm.  The findings are rejected as fallacious;
2. With more anomalous findings, paradigm model is stretched to explain, denying the inadequacy of the paradigm model;
3. Due to the weaknesses in the paradigm model, the number of anomalies increase to the level that they can no longer be disregarded, or explained, or handled by the prevailing paradigm.  This is a wakeup call to realize that the paradigm model may be inadequate; 
4. Formulation of a modified paradigm model that may treat the previously denied anomalies;
5. The transitional period, during which the existing establishment and vested interests resist the needed change; and,
6. Final acceptance of the modified paradigm model equipped to handle the anomalous occurrences previously denied as odd, infrequent, accidental, or fallacious.

The bigger and more diverse the societies, the longer the transitional period for paradigm shift.  However, if the shift evolution does not keep up with the demands of the changing conditions, it may trigger revolution in the society.

The USA seems to be in the third stage.  It must re-examine its democratic system based on the 18^th century knowledge of human nature and shore up its weaknesses to meet the new challenges.