Theory of Paradigm Selection

The study of the messy, often non-rational process by which one paradigm wins over its rivals. Kuhn argued this isn't a simple logic puzzle; it involves persuasion, generational change, aesthetic preference ("elegance"), problem-solving promise, and the death of old-guard professors. Truth doesn't automatically win; the winning paradigm defines what counts as truth for the next era.

Theory of Paradigm Selection Example: Plate tectonics didn't win the paradigm war in geology just because it had better data. It won through paradigm selection: young geographers were dazzled by its elegant maps, it solved puzzles across sub-fields (seismology, paleontology), and, crucially, its elderly opponents in the "fixed continent" paradigm eventually retired. The social process of science selected the new reality.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 6, 2026

Theory of Paradigm Dispute

The analysis of the incommensurable arguments that occur when proponents of different paradigms literally talk past each other. Because paradigms define terms, methods, and standards of proof differently, there is no neutral court of appeal. A dispute between paradigms is less a debate and more a cross-cultural dialogue of the deaf, where each side sees the other as fundamentally irrational or blind.

Theory of Paradigm Dispute Example: A paradigm dispute in economics: A Neoclassical economist (paradigm: markets are efficient) and a Keynesian economist (paradigm: markets fail and need intervention) argue about a recession. They use the same words ("demand," "equilibrium") but mean totally different things. Their evidence and models are built on incompatible axioms. The dispute often devolves into accusing the other of "not understanding basic economics"—their own paradigm's basics.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 6, 2026

Theory of Scientific Dispute

The examination of conflicts within a shared scientific paradigm. These are fights over data interpretation, model accuracy, or technical details, but everyone agrees on the core rules of the game. This is "normal science" arguing over moves, not whether to burn the rulebook.

Theory of Scientific Dispute Example: The current scientific dispute over the best model for dark energy is fierce. All cosmologists share the same paradigm (general relativity, Big Bang cosmology), but they dispute whether dark energy is a cosmological constant, a dynamic field, or a sign general relativity is wrong at its edges. It's a high-stakes family feud with shared DNA.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 6, 2026

Theory of Metascientific Dispute

A fight about the fight—a conflict over how to interpret, validate, or conduct the scientific process itself. It's a dispute one level above the science, often between philosophers, sociologists, and reflective scientists. The topic isn't a fact about nature, but a fact about how we know facts about nature.

Theory of Metascientific Dispute Example: The replication crisis in psychology sparked a metascientific dispute. The fight isn't about a specific psychological theory, but about the validity of statistical methods (p-hacking), publication bias, and the very integrity of the scientific process in that field. It's a crisis of methodology, not of mind.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 6, 2026

Theory of Epistemological Dispute

A fundamental clash between different frameworks of knowledge, often manifesting as culture wars or ideological battles. It's when groups not only disagree on conclusions but on the foundational rules for making a valid argument: Is personal experience valid evidence? Is sacred text an authority? This is a paradigm dispute applied to the whole of society.

Theory of Epistemological Dispute Example: The public debate on climate change often becomes an epistemological dispute. One side operates on a scientific empiricist paradigm (evidence from models and data). The other may operate on a populist or ideological paradigm (distrust of elite institutions, prioritization of economic liberty). They aren't disputing the data; they're disputing the epistemological authority of the data itself.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 6, 2026

Meta-Apophenia Theory

The tendency to perceive meaningful connections or patterns in the act of pattern-perception itself. It's seeing apophenia everywhere, even in places where it's a legitimate analytical tool. This is the skeptic's cognitive trap: you become so vigilant against false patterns that you start to see the bias of apophenia as the primary explanation for any proposed connection, including valid ones. You mistake the map of cognitive errors for the territory of reality, creating a blind spot where genuine synchronicity or causality is dismissed as just another mental glitch.

Meta-Apophenia Theory Example: A researcher proposes a novel link between two rare diseases. A critic steeped in Meta-Apophenia immediately scoffs, "That's just your brain connecting random dots. You're suffering from apophenia about medical data." They fail to engage with the specific biological pathway evidence, because they've become pattern-blind to actual patterns by over-diagnosing the pattern-finding error in others.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 6, 2026

Meta-Pareidolia Theory

The act of seeing meaningful images or faces in examples of pareidolia itself. It's perceiving a higher-order "face" or intentional design in humanity's universal tendency to see faces in clouds, toast, or rock formations. This theory often veers into the philosophical or mystical, suggesting that our collective drive to find faces isn't just a neural bug, but is itself a "face" or signature of a deeper cosmic tendency toward order, or even a designer who built that bias into us.

Meta-Pareidolia Theory Example: Someone looks at a collage of hundreds of photos of "Jesus in toast" or "the Man in the Moon" and declares, "Don't you see? The fact that we all do this, everywhere, is the real face! The universe is winking at us through our own brains." This is Meta-Pareidolia—interpreting the pattern of pareidolic events as itself a grand, meaningful pattern.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 6, 2026