a paradigm shift on the concept of paradigm shifting?

Metaphysical, ontological and epistemological frameworks destroy not simply by their being lived out as false beliefs. None of them are believed fully enough to be internalized into the workings of the body that completely. Rather, they destroy through the compromise they reach with the body, and by the incongruence between belief and action that ensues. This is another reason why “paradigm shifting” and some of the presumptions of “transformative learning” based on thought-down experiences are along not enough. To illustrate this with a simple example: when the paradigm of determinism swept over us as a culture, it did so incompletely, for even its staunchest allies acted out their daily affairs without ever really doing away with the causal “I”. Nevertheless, as a cultural phenomena, determinism became accepted in technological, futuristic and economic spheres, and in ethical considerations generally, to the extent that our actions based on abstract and reasoned modes of thought were lured by determinism’s enthralling logic. The assumption that changing thought alone is sufficient is erroneous for the same reason that ideal is generally: solitary power is placed on thought, which is in fact but a recent player in the game. The body, the heart, and the context have their own modes of being which, although interactive with thought, are certainly not subordinate to it.