Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meta-paradigm

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. W.marsh 17:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Meta-paradigm

See also Meta-paradigmal theory (AfD discussion).

Meta-paradigm (discussion|history|protect|delete|undelete|logs|links)

Confusing due to lack of context. The sources, such as they are, do not convince me that this is an important or even well-defined concept. Leibniz 15:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Given that in the extended sense popularized by Thomas Kuhn, a paradigm is an overarching pattern of thought that pervades a science, claims about meta-paradigms strike me as so abstract to be altogether meaningless. - Smerdis of Tlön 17:03, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
• Related nomination: Cognitive panorama. It all seems to come from the personal web page of this Benking guy. There is a link to an "encyclopedia", but that is some sort of wiki, not a WP:RS. Leibniz 17:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete this too as complete bollocks: . . . a conceptual superstructure that defines and identifies topics as logical places, displays relations and connections within these topics or issues. It is a combination of three extensional Spaces = the physical space, a context space, also called "rubics cube of ecology," and a terminological space or "switching space" for various levels for different languages. Or, as Aristophanes makes Socrates say in The Clouds:

I’d never come up with a single thing
about celestial phenomena,
if I did not suspend my mind up high,
to mix my subtle thoughts with what’s like them—
the air. . . .

Smerdis of Tlön 19:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

• Indeed. It also says:

1. open-ended universality,
2. loss of meaning,
3. loss of context

which seems oddly topical for this little nest of pages. Leibniz 20:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete pseudopostmodernist nonsense. Lankiveil 01:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC).
• Delete -- whether the concept of a paradigm is even a valid one is a debate in and of itself. We're talking about something that is basically the fourth derivative of science. Haikupoet 06:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete both per Aristophanes (and Smerdis of Tlön). Good for buzzword bingo though. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.