Black Music Matters by Ed Sarath

Author:Ed Sarath
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: undefined
Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers
Published: 2012-08-19T16:00:00+00:00

Multiple Paradigms Framework

The basic idea is that critical vitality is optimal when arguments for change and conservation are grounded in substantive understanding of contrasting perspectives. I am talking about more than anecdotal, generalized descriptions of one’s inclinations, or the viewpoints being opposed. Rather, I am talking about highly informed, peer-reviewed (or peer reviewable) accounts in which underlying assumptions are related to overlying practices, thus comprising paradigms. It is not enough, therefore, to advance and frame one’s own perspectives in as sophisticated a manner as possible; it is equally important to exhibit conversance with models with which one might take issue. When this criterion is applied to both one’s own perspectives as well as those of others, one not only raises the critical bar but also elevates the backdrop of professional courtesy and collegiality. Now minimally informed, kneejerk reactions can give way to the healthy juxtaposition of contrasting worldviews and philosophically robust exchange.

While one might well wonder if something along these lines is not already in place, a closer look at typical faculty deliberations quickly dispels any such illusions. For one thing, while the conservative voice inevitably assumes prominence in any deliberations about change, the onus is typically on advocates of some new idea to make their case; it is rarely on adherents of convention to justify their position in any sophisticated manner. Accordingly, while change agents must routinely provide a rationale for their ideas along the above lines, conservatives are rarely required to do the same. It is simply not part of curricular discourse for advocacy of reigning paradigms to be grounded in compelling rationale; instead, the fact is that a given approach has long been in place, coupled with presumptions that corresponding rationale exists somewhere in the academic committee archives or research literature. But think about it—where is there a peer-reviewed or reviewable case for the conventional curriculum, particularly as assessed against even what I call neo-Eurocentric-plus, let alone integral alternatives? One is hard-pressed to not only identify such a case but also even imagine what it might look like.

The inertia of the status quo reigns supreme in academic discourse, and I believe the multiple paradigms criterion has much to offer breaking out of this pattern.

For change advocates, moreover, I add a further criterion to the framework—the need to provide an informed account for not only a conventional and preferred new model, but also at least one alternative to that reform model. This will help change agents who, at least in principle, resonate with the idea of paradigmatic change, yet remain entrapped in the inertia of the prevailing paradigm, break free from its binding influence. My delineation of lower order and higher order change advocacy, both of which are framed in distinction to a neo-Eurocentric conventional model, is an example of this requisite fulfilled. My identification, moreover, of two higher order models, one creativity-driven, the other consciousness-driven, extends this fulfillment idea.[22]

Here I might further note a parallel that I have observed among change advocates to the above-mentioned absence of critically robust rationale for the conventional model.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.