72
2 The Use of Paradigms and Theories in the PULSE 3 …
of the mysterious; they are a means of uncovering that which is invisible. With
multiple paradigms and theories, scholars can extend their investigations to include
other theoretical phenomena relating to the issues under investigation. Therefore,
paradigms and theories go hand-in-hand in explaining and understanding natural
and social scientific concepts. Furthermore, as cognitive instruments, paradigms and
theories assist academics in their work of defining and conceptualising a variety
of phenomena. Paradigms provide the background knowledge or frames that allow
scholars to test and measure their theories. Because of this quality, a paradigm could
contain several theories within its structure. The purpose of theories is to explain
phenomena, based on certain criteria. That said, paradigms and theories operate
concurrently, although their differences provide the mainstay of science. With limited
information in hand, theories extend the ability of our cognitive processes to explain
that which is often unexplained. Paradigms and theories inform human practices,
from conducting research, to developing and implementing green and ecological
infrastructure projects. Just as a textile loom produces multi-coloured fabrics and a
variety of designs, our minds also bring forth multiple explanations of how occurrences are connected in the tangible world (Myers 1887; Sherrington 1942; Meissner
2017). To reiterate, we produce multiple theories to not only solve mysteries and
explain or understand our multiple natural and social environments, but also to assist
us in our daily lives. Theories are inherent to the never-ending cognitive processes by
which we recognise, experience and think about things, as well as how we understand
them and act (Meissner 2017).
PULSE
3 consists of several components, namely, the paradigm assessment, the
repertoire of theories, causal mechanisms, as well as the problem-solving and critical theory typology. It gives a pragmatic perspective on the utilisation and role of
paradigms and theories in conducting analyses. The main objective of the analytical approach is to study the knowledge content of situations and issues that are
expressed in written form. The framework utilises an open-ended problem analysis,
which means that it does not employ the traditional hypothesis formulation and analysis methods. The hypothesis testing of complex social matters is frequently the
victim of active substantiation, when specialists identify and use these variables to
validate the hypothesis and discard the evidence that contradicts it (Meissner 2017).
They then have the tendency to predict outcomes that are based on pre-identified
variables that might have only a small influence, or no bearing at all, on the problem
at hand. This means that no scientist can claim to offer an objective and unbiased
situational analysis.
For PULSE
3 , the purpose of science is not the discovery of absolute truths, but
a commitment to constant critique by means of open-ended problem formulation.
An open-ended analysis starts with collecting information on a phenomenon and
does not attempt to prove or disprove a hypothesis that is linked to the occurrence.
Rather than predicting, in order to assume an unobserved event, an open-ended
inquiry embraces the complexity of the event and the complex interactions of its
different aspects. The findings need to span both the practical problems and the
scientific and research debates. In order to do this, an open-ended investigation shows
how the causal forces from different perspectives co-exist as part of a complex
2 The Use of Paradigms and Theories in the PULSE 3 …
of the mysterious; they are a means of uncovering that which is invisible. With
multiple paradigms and theories, scholars can extend their investigations to include
other theoretical phenomena relating to the issues under investigation. Therefore,
paradigms and theories go hand-in-hand in explaining and understanding natural
and social scientific concepts. Furthermore, as cognitive instruments, paradigms and
theories assist academics in their work of defining and conceptualising a variety
of phenomena. Paradigms provide the background knowledge or frames that allow
scholars to test and measure their theories. Because of this quality, a paradigm could
contain several theories within its structure. The purpose of theories is to explain
phenomena, based on certain criteria. That said, paradigms and theories operate
concurrently, although their differences provide the mainstay of science. With limited
information in hand, theories extend the ability of our cognitive processes to explain
that which is often unexplained. Paradigms and theories inform human practices,
from conducting research, to developing and implementing green and ecological
infrastructure projects. Just as a textile loom produces multi-coloured fabrics and a
variety of designs, our minds also bring forth multiple explanations of how occurrences are connected in the tangible world (Myers 1887; Sherrington 1942; Meissner
2017). To reiterate, we produce multiple theories to not only solve mysteries and
explain or understand our multiple natural and social environments, but also to assist
us in our daily lives. Theories are inherent to the never-ending cognitive processes by
which we recognise, experience and think about things, as well as how we understand
them and act (Meissner 2017).
PULSE
3 consists of several components, namely, the paradigm assessment, the
repertoire of theories, causal mechanisms, as well as the problem-solving and critical theory typology. It gives a pragmatic perspective on the utilisation and role of
paradigms and theories in conducting analyses. The main objective of the analytical approach is to study the knowledge content of situations and issues that are
expressed in written form. The framework utilises an open-ended problem analysis,
which means that it does not employ the traditional hypothesis formulation and analysis methods. The hypothesis testing of complex social matters is frequently the
victim of active substantiation, when specialists identify and use these variables to
validate the hypothesis and discard the evidence that contradicts it (Meissner 2017).
They then have the tendency to predict outcomes that are based on pre-identified
variables that might have only a small influence, or no bearing at all, on the problem
at hand. This means that no scientist can claim to offer an objective and unbiased
situational analysis.
For PULSE
3 , the purpose of science is not the discovery of absolute truths, but
a commitment to constant critique by means of open-ended problem formulation.
An open-ended analysis starts with collecting information on a phenomenon and
does not attempt to prove or disprove a hypothesis that is linked to the occurrence.
Rather than predicting, in order to assume an unobserved event, an open-ended
inquiry embraces the complexity of the event and the complex interactions of its
different aspects. The findings need to span both the practical problems and the
scientific and research debates. In order to do this, an open-ended investigation shows
how the causal forces from different perspectives co-exist as part of a complex