Understanding Paradigms in Geography

Hello everyone. Welcome to the Geoecologist. I'm Dr. Krishnanand and in this session we're going to learn about the concept of paradigms and paradigm shift in geography. So what is this word paradigm all about? Is it different from theory or the set of theories is known as paradigm? So all these questions that you have in your mind will be answered in this session. But before we go ahead, please like and subscribe to our channel and don't forget to share the videos with all others. So now let's learn about this word paradigms first. So what is this meaning? It's basically paradigma which basically means pattern or example coming from Latin or from Greek pattern, model, precedent or example. So basically it means that there are lots of important theories of concepts that come under the same umbrella. So there is a common theme for all those theories. So that is important. So in 20th century what we see that it began to be used in the more specific philosophical sense this word paradigm. In what ways? In the way of logical or conceptual structure serving as a form of thought within a given area of experience. So it was important to be having this idea of paradigm in all the subject matter, especially in the social sciences. So it gained significance in 20th century as a conceptual structure or a conceptual umbrella under which this specific theories that belong to the same family we can say or these specific theories which belong to the same theme or they have similar logical structure behind it. So they come under the same paradigm. So especially in Thomas Kuhn's work, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions published in 1962, it got people talking about the paradigms and paradigm shifts especially in geography and other social sciences. So geography as other subjects has passed from descriptive to the model making stage. As we see that right from the ancient, right from the pre Greeks and Romans to Greek or Roman to Arab. to then middle ages and further the classical phase of geography and to the modern phase of geography in 20th century we see that geography has transformed its nature its method basically from descriptive to the model making science so now it's important to understand these shifts that happened within the framework of geographical thought as well so this process started basically in 19th century and got acceleration during the 50s of the present century. So this was the time period when this paradigm concept and paradigm shift was lots of talk amongst the scholars in geography. So this journey of geographical evolution is studied under evolution of geographical thought as we know and which at any point of time presents this important interaction between two important things. So what is that? First is the prevailing philosophical viewpoints. So there are numerous viewpoints in a given subject matter and then it also has methodological approaches. It means the collection of the methods, the tools, the techniques to analyze those important viewpoints. So there is an interaction between the philosophical viewpoints and methodological approaches. So that's important to understand the framework or the understanding of making of a paradigm. For example if we talk about geography, so geographical laws can be tested only in the fields where conditions are not controlled. Unlike what? Unlike other physical laws. Because we understand that phenomena that we study in geography is dynamic. So moreover like the laws of economics, geographical laws can be tested only if other things are being equal. So many of the theories and laws that we study in geography are very contextual in nature and That is where it is different from the general laws that we talk in science. So the principle of activity is important that applies in geography which means that every phenomena is changing in time and space. So normally when we study the natural laws, so what happens? For example law of gravity. So it is similar everywhere. The principle applies everywhere but remember principle of activity is important in geographical connotation. which keeps changing in time and space. The ideographic feature and the nomothetic feature that is the regional as well as systematic feature that has different types of laws and models which differ from laws of physical sciences exist in the geographical studies. So the historical journey of geography can be understood by understanding the concept of this paradigm that was given by Thomas Kuhn. That's why this paradigm which you see here, the diagram, so paradigm that again there is a crisis phase and then again there is a new paradigm creation. This keeps on happening. For example, right from the geocentric theory to the heliocentric theory, there is a paradigm shift that we observe, especially in the field of astronomy. So, this is one example. So, the use of this word paradigm became familiar in the field of geography with paper of David Hauwe in 1970s specifically on revolution and counter-revolution. So, in 60s and 70s, we find this word paradigm gaining importance. So, let's understand further. So, 2D works. of Thomas Kuhn in his classical book the structure of scientific revolutions set the stage for debate on how the knowledge base play a role in advance of science and related discipline grows and evolves so basically Thomas Kuhn talked about the knowledge base that had a pivotal role in the advancement of science and the advancement and growth or evolution of that discipline so Kuhn postulated a theory about the growth and development of science and defines paradigm as this particular statement. So what is the statement? The entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques and methods. Remember these four words that were used to define the paradigm in the Kuhn's theory of this paradigm. So this is basically what a collection, a constellation of beliefs, values, techniques and methods shared by the members of a given community. or universally recognized scientific achievements. So basically the idea is of unity among the followers. On what basis? On the basis of these particular beliefs, values, techniques and method. So suppose I say that I believe that environment is the key. Environment is the center. So environment determines. Right? So environment is the center and rest everything like human beings and other things follow. So environment. is the controller of everything. So this is one way of understanding environmental determinism. But there are many theories that support it right from the Darwin's theory to Ratzel's concept to Semple's concept as we have studied in geographical thought. So what happens? Environmental determinism becomes an umbrella under which there are several contributors, several theorists which gave this. So they believe in the same idea, same ideology that is what paradigm basically means. So paradigm is the set of beliefs, values, techniques and methods which has a commonality of all those believers of all those community. So that is the simplest way of understanding what a paradigm basically means. So it can be also understood as universally recognized scientific achievements that for a given time provides model problems and solutions to the practitioners of that particular method of science. So that is is important here. Now, let's understand this statement if you observe here. What happens that when there are followers of a particular paradigm they are very rigid of their own thought process. So that's where this statement becomes very famous. So when this person is looking at the cat and saying never ever think outside the box. It basically means only think in a particular way. So when most of the people are going to think in particular way what happens this is one paradigm. So all the people are thinking in a similar way. So what happens? There is some kind of rigidity involved. And many times because of rigidity, what happens? There is a decline. So because of this rigidity, there is a decline in the thought process, in the development of science. So what Thomas Kuhn actually represented in his famous diagram of this paradigm shift or the paradigm change that we see is that pre-paradigm is the first phase. Basically means before a set of. idea is universalized or accepted by many theorists or many scholars there are lots of theories that is what the pre-paradigm phase is then what happens there is advent of professionalism it basically means that now there is a professional understanding of the processes the belief the methodology techniques in that particular study and then comes the paradigm phase so paradigm phase number one now here what happens most of the people or most of the scientists are believer in the same set of ideals that is the same set of theme. So this is paradigm one. Then what happens because of this stagnancy in the same kind of theme? What happens? Then there is again crisis within that revolution. So when too much of emphasis is only given on this particular theme, it starts to decline and there is a crisis phase. Then what happens? There is a paradigm phase two. So what happens there is a growth of another paradigm from the first one crossing this crisis phase. It means somebody thinks out of the box again. So there is a advent of new theory. So for example if we say that geocentric theory was the first idea or for example if we say flat disk. So Earth was a flat disk floating in water was the first paradigm. So most of these scholars thought that this is right. Then somebody said no Earth is spherical. So then spherical Earth became the major concept. Right? So this is how the paradigm shifts from phase 1 to phase 2. So now most of the scholars in phase 2 would be talking about the same kind of theory where earth is a sphere. So that's how again there is a crisis phase. Again there is some kind of stagnancy in the knowledge form, in the methodological form and then there is a paradigm phase which again changes. So paradigm 3 emerges and this keeps on happening with time. So remember this pre-paradigm phase to professionalism to the paradigm phase and then again the crisis and rise of another paradigm. These are the five stages that we see here. So remember how many stages are there now? Stage number one that is pre-paradigm phase, then professionalism, then paradigm phase, then crisis phase and then again away from the crisis paradigm phase two. So these are the five major phases in which The development of a discipline keeps happening. What do you mean by development of discipline? The changes in belief system, theory system, the ideas basically and the larger part that we say is methodology changes. So this keeps happening in this particular sequence. So this was stated by the Kuhn's theory or Kuhn's model that we say of paradigm shift. But remember he was not the only one contributor to this idea of paradigm shift or paradigm changes. Haggit in 1983 also defined paradigm as kind of something called supermodel. A model that is acceptable by many people which has the ideas or you may say it provides intuitive or inductive rules about the kinds of phenomena scientists should investigate. and the best methods of investigation. So this is how Peter Haggit, basically we have studied Peter Haggit in where? In the quantitative revolution, in the locational and spatial analysis. So there he talks about the definition of the supermodel thought of this paradigm. Then there was another scholar, Musterman in 1970. He put this idea of paradigm into three main phases or types. So what is that? The one is metaphysical paradigms or meta paradigms. Second is sociological paradigm and the third he said was artifact or the construct paradigm. So what is this? The meta paradigm represents totality. So total global view of science. That was interesting point of the first part that is metaphysical paradigm. The other is the sociological paradigm. It talks about society obviously. So universally recognized scientific achievements related to the social existence. Then the third one is the artifact. Basically means the creation of human beings. So that is where the textbook instrument or the classic work of Kuhn's formation that we see. That is how we have created and recreated. Then again there has been a crisis and then again there has been a creation of something new. So this is what the master man had to say regarding the idea of paradigms. Apart from master man we have another scholar R.J. Johnston who identified six geographical paradigms that is basically disciplinary matrices. He said that there are basic six paradigms in geographical studies. The first is called exploration. So there was a phase when most of the knowledge was gathered through exploration. Then what happened? Most of the theories that people or scholars build that was environmentally determining. So it became environmental determinism. Then next was about studying the uniqueness, the ideographic approach that is about regional concepts or regionalism. Then geography as a spatial science. Then scientific understanding came into geography. Empiricism came into geography and law making came into geography. So this spatial science, locational and spatial. analysis dominated the discipline. Then next important paradigm that he talks about is behavioralism. So what is this? It's talking about human beings nature. That is about the behavior of human beings in a given context. So that was important. And then radical and structural concepts. That is the evolution of society in a structured format in which the resources or the access to resources, the economy and the society is intertwined. So that was about the radical and structural approach. So this was given by Johnston. Then another concept of this paradigm was given by Harvey and Hawley in 1981 and they have identified five pieces of geographic literature as paradigmatic or the exemplars. So as we say exemplary works. Whose work? For example Radzell's Anthropogeography. So it was talking about which paradigm? As we see environmental determinism. Vidal de la Blas's Possibilism. also known as tableau. Then Sauer's work of morphology of landscape that we study in cultural geography that was considered as one of the important exemplary paradigms. Then Hartshon's work of nature of geography which focused upon remember the regional approach coming from the corological descriptive approach. Then the Schaeffer's paradigm that is of exceptionalism that was talking about the idea where nomothetic approach the scientific law making approach dominated. So these five major literary works which led to the paradigmatic shift in this discipline itself were considered as the exemplars or the major paradigmatic work in geography. So basic understanding of paradigm again what is that? From one paradigm what happens there is a creation of normal scientific understanding then what happens there is anomalies existing within that science and then there is a crisis phase So what happens? Right from the top there is a degradation of the thought process and finally there is a rise again. So paradigm can be understood simply if you look at this as like a wave. So what happens? It grows, reaches its peak, then again degrades, then again goes back and again. So this keeps on happening. So that's why this is some kind of a cycle. And at last let's understand this in a completeness. So what is this paradigm shift in geography? So right from the cosmological to corological, from corological to the lived world and from life world to welfare and disparity. What do we see? There is a change happening continuously in the subject matter or the geographical thought. So one paradigm if you look at is regionalism. So you look at these scientists or the scholars named Hartshon, Robertson, Stamm, Dickinson, Vidali, Leblash, Hetner. All of them talked about... A singular theme that was a paradigm of region, uniqueness, gender divide or maybe the concept of the corology or maybe the concept of aerial differentiation. They talk about largely the same idea of uniqueness on the earth's surface, isn't it? Then what we see here is another paradigm of humanism. They talk about human attributes. So who are the scholars? Kirk, Wright, Vidalia Laplace and so many others like Yufit Tuan, Saar. So they talked about human aspects in the phenomena, right? Like human behavior, human emotions. They have important place to define a given spatial characteristic. Then we see Marxism. This was another approach of looking at how the world is shaped by the economy. So that was important. So who are the scholars? Richard, Pete, David Harvey, Thrift, Massey, Gregory, Smith. All those people talked about the phenomena or the idea of geographical ... places in terms of the Marxist viewpoint. So that became another important paradigm. Then what we see is space itself. So speciality or spatial distribution or the idea of spatial distribution. So who talked about that? Peter Haggit, Haggis Tran, August Lodge, Christaller, Ullmann, Schaeffer. They all talked about explanation of the space as a sum total, as a completeness, as a nomothetic space. So this is what we talk when we say that there has been a paradigm shift. Otherwise also if you look at different way of explanation. So what do we see? First paradigm we say that is environmental determinism. Then what we see is the possibilistic school which talked about largely the human beings. Then we see is the regional idea. So the regional synthesis that we say or regional description and then we say is the spatial analysis. So many scholars have also talked about only these four paradigms. But remember it's all dependent upon how we define it. So as we saw different scholars have defined paradigms in different ways. So this is one way to define it that there are many theories right from ancient till today which talk about the dominance of nature over human beings as controllers that is environmental determinism. But when human beings find possibility in the opportunities they fall into the possibilist category or the humanist category. Then if you talk about specific important uniquenesses in the space then it comes under the regional synthesis. thesis, the idea of region and then if we talk about interactions between those important regions and making a unity of that, that comes into the spatial analysis. So that is how a sum total understanding of the paradigm should be learned. So now when we have discussed the concept of paradigms and the paradigms in geography and the Kuhn's model of paradigm, how it explains the definition and the five stages, remember that. that these are important building blocks of the evolution of geographical thought. For more lectures to come, stay tuned, stay safe and all my best wishes.

Hello everyone. Welcome to the Geoecologist. I'm Dr. Krishnanand and in this session we're going to learn about the concept of paradigms and paradigm shift in geography.

So what is this word paradigm all about? Is it different from theory or the set of theories is known as paradigm? So all these questions that you have in your mind will be answered in this session.

But before we go ahead, please like and subscribe to our channel and don't forget to share the videos with all others. So now let's learn about this word paradigms first. So what is this meaning? It's basically paradigma which basically means pattern or example coming from Latin or from Greek pattern, model, precedent or example. So basically it means that there are lots of important theories of concepts that come under the same umbrella.

So there is a common theme for all those theories. So that is important. So in 20th century what we see that it began to be used in the more specific philosophical sense this word paradigm.

In what ways? In the way of logical or conceptual structure serving as a form of thought within a given area of experience. So it was important to be having this idea of paradigm in all the subject matter, especially in the social sciences.

So it gained significance in 20th century as a conceptual structure or a conceptual umbrella under which this specific theories that belong to the same family we can say or these specific theories which belong to the same theme or they have similar logical structure behind it. So they come under the same paradigm. So especially in Thomas Kuhn's work, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions published in 1962, it got people talking about the paradigms and paradigm shifts especially in geography and other social sciences.

So geography as other subjects has passed from descriptive to the model making stage. As we see that right from the ancient, right from the pre Greeks and Romans to Greek or Roman to Arab. to then middle ages and further the classical phase of geography and to the modern phase of geography in 20th century we see that geography has transformed its nature its method basically from descriptive to the model making science so now it's important to understand these shifts that happened within the framework of geographical thought as well so this process started basically in 19th century and got acceleration during the 50s of the present century. So this was the time period when this paradigm concept and paradigm shift was lots of talk amongst the scholars in geography.

So this journey of geographical evolution is studied under evolution of geographical thought as we know and which at any point of time presents this important interaction between two important things. So what is that? First is the prevailing philosophical viewpoints.

So there are numerous viewpoints in a given subject matter and then it also has methodological approaches. It means the collection of the methods, the tools, the techniques to analyze those important viewpoints. So there is an interaction between the philosophical viewpoints and methodological approaches. So that's important to understand the framework or the understanding of making of a paradigm. For example if we talk about geography, so geographical laws can be tested only in the fields where conditions are not controlled.

Unlike what? Unlike other physical laws. Because we understand that phenomena that we study in geography is dynamic. So moreover like the laws of economics, geographical laws can be tested only if other things are being equal. So many of the theories and laws that we study in geography are very contextual in nature and That is where it is different from the general laws that we talk in science.

So the principle of activity is important that applies in geography which means that every phenomena is changing in time and space. So normally when we study the natural laws, so what happens? For example law of gravity.

So it is similar everywhere. The principle applies everywhere but remember principle of activity is important in geographical connotation. which keeps changing in time and space. The ideographic feature and the nomothetic feature that is the regional as well as systematic feature that has different types of laws and models which differ from laws of physical sciences exist in the geographical studies.

So the historical journey of geography can be understood by understanding the concept of this paradigm that was given by Thomas Kuhn. That's why this paradigm which you see here, the diagram, so paradigm that again there is a crisis phase and then again there is a new paradigm creation. This keeps on happening. For example, right from the geocentric theory to the heliocentric theory, there is a paradigm shift that we observe, especially in the field of astronomy. So, this is one example.

So, the use of this word paradigm became familiar in the field of geography with paper of David Hauwe in 1970s specifically on revolution and counter-revolution. So, in 60s and 70s, we find this word paradigm gaining importance. So, let's understand further.

So, 2D works. of Thomas Kuhn in his classical book the structure of scientific revolutions set the stage for debate on how the knowledge base play a role in advance of science and related discipline grows and evolves so basically Thomas Kuhn talked about the knowledge base that had a pivotal role in the advancement of science and the advancement and growth or evolution of that discipline so Kuhn postulated a theory about the growth and development of science and defines paradigm as this particular statement. So what is the statement?

The entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques and methods. Remember these four words that were used to define the paradigm in the Kuhn's theory of this paradigm. So this is basically what a collection, a constellation of beliefs, values, techniques and methods shared by the members of a given community. or universally recognized scientific achievements. So basically the idea is of unity among the followers.

On what basis? On the basis of these particular beliefs, values, techniques and method. So suppose I say that I believe that environment is the key. Environment is the center. So environment determines.

Right? So environment is the center and rest everything like human beings and other things follow. So environment. is the controller of everything. So this is one way of understanding environmental determinism.

But there are many theories that support it right from the Darwin's theory to Ratzel's concept to Semple's concept as we have studied in geographical thought. So what happens? Environmental determinism becomes an umbrella under which there are several contributors, several theorists which gave this. So they believe in the same idea, same ideology that is what paradigm basically means.

So paradigm is the set of beliefs, values, techniques and methods which has a commonality of all those believers of all those community. So that is the simplest way of understanding what a paradigm basically means. So it can be also understood as universally recognized scientific achievements that for a given time provides model problems and solutions to the practitioners of that particular method of science.

So that is is important here. Now, let's understand this statement if you observe here. What happens that when there are followers of a particular paradigm they are very rigid of their own thought process. So that's where this statement becomes very famous. So when this person is looking at the cat and saying never ever think outside the box.

It basically means only think in a particular way. So when most of the people are going to think in particular way what happens this is one paradigm. So all the people are thinking in a similar way. So what happens?

There is some kind of rigidity involved. And many times because of rigidity, what happens? There is a decline.

So because of this rigidity, there is a decline in the thought process, in the development of science. So what Thomas Kuhn actually represented in his famous diagram of this paradigm shift or the paradigm change that we see is that pre-paradigm is the first phase. Basically means before a set of.

idea is universalized or accepted by many theorists or many scholars there are lots of theories that is what the pre-paradigm phase is then what happens there is advent of professionalism it basically means that now there is a professional understanding of the processes the belief the methodology techniques in that particular study and then comes the paradigm phase so paradigm phase number one now here what happens most of the people or most of the scientists are believer in the same set of ideals that is the same set of theme. So this is paradigm one. Then what happens because of this stagnancy in the same kind of theme? What happens?

Then there is again crisis within that revolution. So when too much of emphasis is only given on this particular theme, it starts to decline and there is a crisis phase. Then what happens? There is a paradigm phase two.

So what happens there is a growth of another paradigm from the first one crossing this crisis phase. It means somebody thinks out of the box again. So there is a advent of new theory.

So for example if we say that geocentric theory was the first idea or for example if we say flat disk. So Earth was a flat disk floating in water was the first paradigm. So most of these scholars thought that this is right. Then somebody said no Earth is spherical.

So then spherical Earth became the major concept. Right? So this is how the paradigm shifts from phase 1 to phase 2. So now most of the scholars in phase 2 would be talking about the same kind of theory where earth is a sphere.

So that's how again there is a crisis phase. Again there is some kind of stagnancy in the knowledge form, in the methodological form and then there is a paradigm phase which again changes. So paradigm 3 emerges and this keeps on happening with time.

So remember this pre-paradigm phase to professionalism to the paradigm phase and then again the crisis and rise of another paradigm. These are the five stages that we see here. So remember how many stages are there now?

Stage number one that is pre-paradigm phase, then professionalism, then paradigm phase, then crisis phase and then again away from the crisis paradigm phase two. So these are the five major phases in which The development of a discipline keeps happening. What do you mean by development of discipline? The changes in belief system, theory system, the ideas basically and the larger part that we say is methodology changes. So this keeps happening in this particular sequence.

So this was stated by the Kuhn's theory or Kuhn's model that we say of paradigm shift. But remember he was not the only one contributor to this idea of paradigm shift or paradigm changes. Haggit in 1983 also defined paradigm as kind of something called supermodel.

A model that is acceptable by many people which has the ideas or you may say it provides intuitive or inductive rules about the kinds of phenomena scientists should investigate. and the best methods of investigation. So this is how Peter Haggit, basically we have studied Peter Haggit in where?

In the quantitative revolution, in the locational and spatial analysis. So there he talks about the definition of the supermodel thought of this paradigm. Then there was another scholar, Musterman in 1970. He put this idea of paradigm into three main phases or types. So what is that?

The one is metaphysical paradigms or meta paradigms. Second is sociological paradigm and the third he said was artifact or the construct paradigm. So what is this?

The meta paradigm represents totality. So total global view of science. That was interesting point of the first part that is metaphysical paradigm.

The other is the sociological paradigm. It talks about society obviously. So universally recognized scientific achievements related to the social existence.

Then the third one is the artifact. Basically means the creation of human beings. So that is where the textbook instrument or the classic work of Kuhn's formation that we see.

That is how we have created and recreated. Then again there has been a crisis and then again there has been a creation of something new. So this is what the master man had to say regarding the idea of paradigms.

Apart from master man we have another scholar R.J. Johnston who identified six geographical paradigms that is basically disciplinary matrices. He said that there are basic six paradigms in geographical studies.

The first is called exploration. So there was a phase when most of the knowledge was gathered through exploration. Then what happened?

Most of the theories that people or scholars build that was environmentally determining. So it became environmental determinism. Then next was about studying the uniqueness, the ideographic approach that is about regional concepts or regionalism. Then geography as a spatial science. Then scientific understanding came into geography.

Empiricism came into geography and law making came into geography. So this spatial science, locational and spatial. analysis dominated the discipline. Then next important paradigm that he talks about is behavioralism.

So what is this? It's talking about human beings nature. That is about the behavior of human beings in a given context. So that was important.

And then radical and structural concepts. That is the evolution of society in a structured format in which the resources or the access to resources, the economy and the society is intertwined. So that was about the radical and structural approach. So this was given by Johnston. Then another concept of this paradigm was given by Harvey and Hawley in 1981 and they have identified five pieces of geographic literature as paradigmatic or the exemplars.

So as we say exemplary works. Whose work? For example Radzell's Anthropogeography.

So it was talking about which paradigm? As we see environmental determinism. Vidal de la Blas's Possibilism.

also known as tableau. Then Sauer's work of morphology of landscape that we study in cultural geography that was considered as one of the important exemplary paradigms. Then Hartshon's work of nature of geography which focused upon remember the regional approach coming from the corological descriptive approach. Then the Schaeffer's paradigm that is of exceptionalism that was talking about the idea where nomothetic approach the scientific law making approach dominated.

So these five major literary works which led to the paradigmatic shift in this discipline itself were considered as the exemplars or the major paradigmatic work in geography. So basic understanding of paradigm again what is that? From one paradigm what happens there is a creation of normal scientific understanding then what happens there is anomalies existing within that science and then there is a crisis phase So what happens?

Right from the top there is a degradation of the thought process and finally there is a rise again. So paradigm can be understood simply if you look at this as like a wave. So what happens?

It grows, reaches its peak, then again degrades, then again goes back and again. So this keeps on happening. So that's why this is some kind of a cycle.

And at last let's understand this in a completeness. So what is this paradigm shift in geography? So right from the cosmological to corological, from corological to the lived world and from life world to welfare and disparity.

What do we see? There is a change happening continuously in the subject matter or the geographical thought. So one paradigm if you look at is regionalism. So you look at these scientists or the scholars named Hartshon, Robertson, Stamm, Dickinson, Vidali, Leblash, Hetner.

All of them talked about... A singular theme that was a paradigm of region, uniqueness, gender divide or maybe the concept of the corology or maybe the concept of aerial differentiation. They talk about largely the same idea of uniqueness on the earth's surface, isn't it?

Then what we see here is another paradigm of humanism. They talk about human attributes. So who are the scholars?

Kirk, Wright, Vidalia Laplace and so many others like Yufit Tuan, Saar. So they talked about human aspects in the phenomena, right? Like human behavior, human emotions.

They have important place to define a given spatial characteristic. Then we see Marxism. This was another approach of looking at how the world is shaped by the economy. So that was important.

So who are the scholars? Richard, Pete, David Harvey, Thrift, Massey, Gregory, Smith. All those people talked about the phenomena or the idea of geographical ...

places in terms of the Marxist viewpoint. So that became another important paradigm. Then what we see is space itself. So speciality or spatial distribution or the idea of spatial distribution. So who talked about that?

Peter Haggit, Haggis Tran, August Lodge, Christaller, Ullmann, Schaeffer. They all talked about explanation of the space as a sum total, as a completeness, as a nomothetic space. So this is what we talk when we say that there has been a paradigm shift.

Otherwise also if you look at different way of explanation. So what do we see? First paradigm we say that is environmental determinism.

Then what we see is the possibilistic school which talked about largely the human beings. Then we see is the regional idea. So the regional synthesis that we say or regional description and then we say is the spatial analysis. So many scholars have also talked about only these four paradigms.

But remember it's all dependent upon how we define it. So as we saw different scholars have defined paradigms in different ways. So this is one way to define it that there are many theories right from ancient till today which talk about the dominance of nature over human beings as controllers that is environmental determinism. But when human beings find possibility in the opportunities they fall into the possibilist category or the humanist category. Then if you talk about specific important uniquenesses in the space then it comes under the regional synthesis.

thesis, the idea of region and then if we talk about interactions between those important regions and making a unity of that, that comes into the spatial analysis. So that is how a sum total understanding of the paradigm should be learned. So now when we have discussed the concept of paradigms and the paradigms in geography and the Kuhn's model of paradigm, how it explains the definition and the five stages, remember that. that these are important building blocks of the evolution of geographical thought.

For more lectures to come, stay tuned, stay safe and all my best wishes.

Transcript for:Understanding Paradigms in Geography

Transcript for:
Understanding Paradigms in Geography