Kuhn proposed, knowledge within any discipline depends on a communally shared commitment to a paradigm.
A paradigm roughly consists of:
an array of assumptions about what exists (ontology)
how it may be known (epistemology)
how scientific work ‘ought’ to proceed (ethics).
a pattern of activities held to be consistent with these assumptions.
Two conclusions follow from these assertions:
A commitment to a paradigm must precede the generation of knowledge. Thus it is the commitment to an a priori set of assumptions and practices that makes knowledge possible. In effect, different paradigms will create different scientific realities, and there is no means of standing outside a paradigm of some kind to adjudicate among them.
Truth exists only within a paradigm.
Individual minds are not the source of knowledge, but communities. Individual knowledge, hence, is not a private achievement but owes its origins to community participation.
Source: Gergen & Gergen. (Eds.). (2003). Social construction: A reader. Sage.
Blainey in his book The Causes of War (1973) lists a number of causes of war in popular imagination.
“In the eighteenth century, many philosophers thought that the ambitions of absolute monarchs were the main cause of war; pull down the mighty, and wars would become rare.
Another theory contended that many wars came from the Anglo-French rivalry for colonies and commerce: restrain that quest, and peace would be more easily preserved.
The wars following the French Revolution fostered an idea that popular revolutions were becoming the main cause of international war.
In the nineteenth century, monarchs who sought to unite their troubled country by a glorious foreign war were widely seen as culprits.
At the end of that century the capitalists‘ chase for markets or investment outlets became a popular villain.
The First World War convinced many writers that armaments races and arms salesmen had become the villains, and both world wars fostered the idea that militarist regimes were the main disturbers of the peace.”
Source: Blainey, G. (1973). TheCauses of War. Free Press. NY.
“The object of this study is the condition of knowledge in the most highly developed societies.I have decided to use the word postmodernto describe that condition. The word is in current use on the American continent among sociologists and critics; it designates the state of our culture following the transformations which, since the end of the nineteenth century, have altered the game rules for science,literature and the arts. The present study will place these transformations in the context of the crisis of narratives.
In psychoanalysis, parapraxis – other called a Freudian slip in quotidian lingo – is an error in speech, memory, or physical action that occurs due to the interference of an unconscious subdued wish or internal train of thought.
In The Psychopathology of Everyday Life Freud suggest parapraxis is, “the phenomena can be traced back to incompletely suppressed psychical material, which, although pushed away by consciousness has nevertheless not been robbed of all capacity for expressing itself” (Freud  1989, p. 344).
In contrast to the widely popular ‘slip of tongue’,Freud described five different forms of parapraxes or slips in his Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis.
This is a summary of and commentary on the prologue titled “The Metropolitan Explosion” of Peter Hall’s (1966), “The World Cities”.
Although the defining elements of his “World City” remain unchanged, a major shift has been in manufacturing (element # 4b) in urban suburbs. The World Cities are gradually leaving behind the role of being hub for the dissemination of (imported and exported) goods, and specializing in technological, financial, and human “resource management”. That is not to suggest that World Cities are no longer ports (element # 2) (e.g. Istanbul, Shanghai, etc.), but being a port city is no longer a necessary condition for being a World City. Neither is being “center of political power” (element # 1) (e.g. New York, San Fransisco, etc.). However, the most fundamental defining element of being a “World City” is being a mecca for “riches” (element # 4) and “talent” (element # 3). Hence, a “World City” is a increasingly defined in terms of the concentration of “financial and human capital” instead of “manufacturing and political capital”.