Methodological Overview - Economics and Ecology: United for a Sustainable World - page 16

fundamental laws. Nonetheless, Oil Shock and the ensuing energy crisis
were merely the tip of the iceberg that ushered in the era of concern about
perpetual and generalized resource scarcity. The collective point of these two
chapters is that we must accept and abide by the most fundamental physical
laws governing all activity on the planet. Any other path is rife with failure.
Proper attention to this entire collection of factors will represent no less
than an alternative worldview. In the words of Thomas Kuhn, in his land-
mark topic Structure of Scientific Revolutions , a new paradigm must emerge. 7
As with all the revolutions that Kuhn discusses, its emergence will not be
without great controversy and resistance, because the required changes
inevitably fly in the face of conventional wisdom.
In other words, cultural evolution expresses itself through changing values.
Paradigm Shift
Culture is not genetically inherited. It can only be learned from the past,
modified in the present, and passed on to future generations. The notion of
culture poses two questions: (1) What happens when the evolution of culture
tears the social fabric with great force because of a shift in values in one part
of society? and (2) How do we heal the social rupture that results from such
a shift in cultural values?
Trying to answer these questions helps put the idea of a paradigm shift in
context with our understanding of a profession as a microcosm of societal
dynamics, such as forestry in the United States, which is relatively young,
rich in experience, and was noble in its early vision. But the vision of its
inception—once on the cutting edge of social responsibility, science, and cor-
rectness for its time—has dimmed and is rapidly being relegated to cultural
history. Be that as it may, prior to casting out an old paradigm, wisdom dic-
tates that we have a new one to take its place.
Each new paradigm is built on a shift of insight, a quantum leap of intu-
ition, with only a modicum of hard, scientific data. Those who cling to the
old way often demand irrefutable, scientific proof that change is needed,
but such proof is seldom available to the diehard's satisfaction. Ironically,
however, today's old way of thinking was yesterday's new way of thinking,
which was challenged by an even older way of thinking to prove change was
necessary or even desirable.
Time and human effort have proven the old paradigm to be more “correct”
in terms of contemporary knowledge than its predecessor, but still only par-
tially “correct.” So it is with the new; it too will be more “correct” than the
old and will eventually be proven to be only partially “correct,” hence in need
of change.
The personal and professional trap of every paradigm lies in its self-limit-
ing nature, which manifests itself when the paradigm becomes too comfort-
able. At that point, new data cannot fit into the old way of thinking, which
has grown rigid with tradition and hardened with age. It is thus necessary