paradigms

[Martha McGinnis]

>>Perhaps I misunderstood, but I don't think Jonathan was making a
>>metatheoretical statement.  I understood him to be making a
>>falsifiable empirical claim: that paradigms may be a useful
>>descriptive tool, but they have no theoretical status.
>
>But they do have theoretical status. Just not in DM.

Again, I didn't mean this metatheoretically.  I understood J to be
proposing that paradigms aren't part of the human linguistic system,
i.e. that they have no status in a *correct* theory, whether that's
DM or some other theory.

Cheers,
Martha
--
mcginnis at ucalgary.ca