Paradigms and planning practice: Conceptual and contextual considerations

Abstract

The regular attention focused upon Thomas Kuhn's paradigm concept by the scientific community over a period of some three decades is, in itself, acknowledgement of the singularly erudite contribution that Kuhn has made to the development of late twentieth century scientific thought. Disciplines in the natural sciences have illustrated the validity of his paradigmatic principles by applying those principles to their fields of activity. The rigorous application of Kuhn's formulation in social science disciplines is, however, a different proposition. The intrinsic attributes of the human sciences are not congruent with those in the natural science domain, nor—by logical inference—with those of the paradigm. This places a discipline such as planning in a predicament. Planning's professional and intellectual legitimacy requires theoretical/methodological foundations such as those associated with a paradigm, but the characteristics of planning are incompatible with the precepts of Kuhn's paradigm. An alternative model is thus needed to provide planning with a tenable theoretical and practical base. It is proposed that the proposition of exemplary modes of practice be considered in this regard. Reference is made to the planning situation in South Africa for the purposes of illustrating the fundamental issues posited.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 15 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.