Translated from Indonesian to English - www.onlinedoctranslator.

com

b. Paradigm Definition

Discussions about paradigms always bring up definitions

diverse. However, this term before it became a popular concept, according to

Ahimsa (2009: ) socio-cultural scientists have used several concepts which have more or less the same
meaning, namely: theoretical framework (theoretical

framework), conceptual framework, framework for thinking

(frame of thinking), theoretical orientation (theoretical orientation), and point of view

(perspective), or approach (approach). In the next use process,

the concept of paradigm is increasingly commonly used but does not necessarily mean the meaning of
the concept

is clear or mutually agreed upon.

Furthermore, Ahimsa (2009: ) differentiates the meaning of paradigm

used by Kuhn to mean a paradigm originating from scientists

other scientists. Kuhn explains a lot about paradigm shifts, but he

himself did not explain clearly what he meant by

paradigm, and does not use the concept consistently in

his various writings. Ahimsa suspects that this is an indirect result

from the topic of discussion, namely paradigm shifts in the natural sciences

only and does not touch on paradigms in socio-cultural sciences. There is

possibly because he felt there was no need to differentiate between the two types of knowledge

knowledge, considering that both are science or

consider that socio-cultural science is not yet a science,

because from a certain perspective the status of science (science) has not been achieved

by that branch of science. The ambiguity of Kuhn's paradigm concept

makes it difficult to use in understanding development and

developing social and cultural sciences even though there are many social and cultural scientists

who has used Khun's perspective.

Meanwhile, Ahimsa (2009) defines paradigm as:

a set of concepts related to each other logically forming

a framework of thought that functions to understand, interpret and

explain the reality and/or problems faced. He gave an explanation

that the word "set" shows that paradigms are diverse

elements and not just single ones where these elements consist of concepts. Concepts are terms or
words that are given a certain meaning. Therefore

That is, a paradigm is also a collection of meanings and understandings. This collection of concepts
constitutes a unity, because

these concepts are related logically, namely paradigmatically,

syntagmatic, metonymic and metaphoric so it can be said as

set of concepts. Meanings and relationships between meanings that emerge in

these thoughts become a collection of concepts that form a framework

thoughts that function to understand and explain reality or

problems encountered. This frame of mind will later function as

tools for understanding understanding, defining, and determining

the reality faced then classifies it into categories, and connects it with other definitions of reality, so that

relationships are established in these thoughts, which then form a

description of the reality faced. However, not everyone

able to be aware of one's own frame of mind or know what a frame is like

thoughts that are owned and used in everyday life. Just share

those who are able to reflect on what they think, the methods and procedures they use. (Ahimsa,
2009: ).

Furthermore, Ahimsa stated that the paradigm has several elements

points, namely: (1) basic assumptions; (2) values; (3) problems that

researched (4) model; (5) concepts; (6) research methods; (7) analysis method;

(8) results of analysis or theory and (9) ethnography or representation. Apart from the views above,
there are still many efforts and views for

Robert Federichs tried to formulate what a paradigm is

formulate the definition of paradigm clearly. Paradigm is a

a fundamental view of a scientific discipline about what is the subject

issues that should be studied. Meanwhile, Ritzer (1989:6) tries

synthesizing the understanding of paradigms proposed by various scientists. According to him

A paradigm is a scientist's fundamental view of what is

is the main issue that should be studied by a branch of science

knowledge. So the paradigm is different from what is the main problem in it

one branch of science according to the concentration of a particular scientist.

Paradigms help scientists to formulate what should be

studied, the questions that must be answered, how they should be

answer, as well as what rules must be followed in interpreting

information collected in order to answer problems

faced. In a particular paradigm there is a common view of what it is

which is the main problem of this branch of science as well as methods and

instrument as an analytical tool. Paradigm is the broadest consensus

found in certain branches of science that differentiate it from

other branches of science. Paradigms classify, formulate and connect various existing examples, theories
and methods.

From the explanation above it can be explained that in one branch

It is very possible that there are various kinds of specific knowledge

paradigm. This variety of paradigms is what causes differences

points of view between scientists about the subject matter that must be studied and

investigated by a particular branch of science. In the context of the development of social sciences,
sociology is not much different in this case.

*Types of Social Science Paradigms

In social sciences or sociology, Ritzer mentions at least

There are three major paradigms, namely, the social facts paradigm, social definitions, and

paradigm of social behavior. Each of these paradigms has its own characteristics

each unique.

1. Social Facts Paradigm

The social facts paradigm is associated with the work of Emile Durkheim in particular

in Suicide and The Rule of Sociological Method. These two books explain

The concept of social facts is applied in studying cases of suicidal symptoms.

According to Durkheim, the concept of social facts is used as a way of avoidance

sociology from the influence of psychology and philosophy. A social fact is something that

is outside the individual and is coercive towards him. Social facts are differentiated

on two things, namely material entities (material entities), namely goods

something that actually exists, while a non-material entity (non-material entity) is something that is
thought to exist. Mostly facts

This social consists of something that is stated as something that is not

must be real, but is something that exists in the human mind

or something that appears in and between human consciousness. Reality

Both material and non-material are intrasubjective realities

and intersubjective.

There are two basic types of social facts, namely: social structures and institutions
social. Included in this paradigm group are functionalism-structural theory and conflict theory. According
to various structural functionalism theories

structures and institutions in society are seen as a relationship

balanced. Society is understood in a process of ongoing change

gradually but still in balance. Meanwhile according to theory

conflict, society is at different levels and conditions

conflict with each other. Balance in society actually occurs because

the result of the use of coercion by powerful groups in society

That.

According to Ritzer (2004) in conducting research, adherents

The social facts paradigm tends to use the interview or questionnaire method. He views other methods
as less appropriate for studying social facts. Para

Researchers will have difficulty studying social structures and social institutions

If you use the experimental method, neither does the observation method

planning doesn't help much either. The most appropriate method for

studying social facts is by historical methods and comparative methods.

This was exemplified by Weber in his research on religion and capitalism.

However, according to Ritzer, adherents of the modern social facts paradigm do not

I am very interested in using historical and comparative methods because they are expensive

large and long time and is considered unscientific.

2. Social Definition Paradigm

The social definition paradigm understands humans as active people

create their own social life. Adherents of the social definition paradigm

directs attention to how humans interpret

their social life or how they shape their lives

real social. In his research, many followers of this paradigm are interested
to social processes that flow from social definition by individuals.

Observing social processes to be able to draw conclusions about

most of the invisible intrasubjective and intersubjective ones

stated by the actor is something very important. Exemplar example

This paradigm is Max Weber's work on social action. Weber was interested

to the subjective meaning that individuals give to actions

done. He focuses on the intersubjective and intrasubjective aspects of

human thought that marks social action. Weber wasn't interested in it

studying macroscopic social facts such as social structure and

social institutions. The attention is more microscopic. For him that is the main thing

the problem of social science is the process of social definition and the consequences of

an action and social interaction. The target of the investigation is intrasubjective and intersubjective
thoughts from social action and interaction. In the investigation Weber suggested using the method

interpretative-understanding or better known as the verstehen method. However, not all of Weber's
works are placed as exemplars

social definition paradigm because some also fall into groups

social facts paradigm. Likewise with Durkheim, not everyone can do it

included in only one group, so Ritzer mentioned the second

This figure is a paradigm bridge.

There are three main theories in the social definition paradigm, namely action theory

social, symbolic interactionism theory and phenomenological theory. Action theory (action

theory) based on the work of Max Weber, which places great emphasis on action

the intersubjective and intrasubjective nature of human thought that characterizes action

social. According to Ritzer, this action theory does not actually make a contribution

which was so important to the development of social science in the United States, however

can encourage developing the theory of symbolic interactionism. Theory

Symbolic interactionism is different from adherents of the social facts paradigm

assume that humans simply react automatically

to stimuli coming from outside himself. According to interactionism

Symbolically there is a thought process that bridges stimulus and response.

It is also different from the social behavior paradigm which states that stimulus

or encouragement causes a reaction directly, but not a response

is a direct result of stimuli originating from outside the human self.

Likewise, the view of the social facts paradigm which emphasizes macroscopic structures and social
institutions as coercive forces that determine actors' actions or actions because for Symbolic
Interactionism, social structures and institutions are only a framework within which the process of social
definition and interaction takes place.

Meanwhile, phenomenological theory emerged as a result of the differences between

action theory and Symbolic Interactionism theory which can be traced back

to Weber's work. This theory places great emphasis on the relationship between realities

social order with the actions of actors. This theory is different from other theories because

greater attention to ordinary daily life

is always considered correct. These theories can also be differentiated on the basis of methodology

he planned to reveal the social situation, so that way

the real world can be studied.

In general, the method used in the social definition paradigm

is observation. Researchers can study the thought processes of perpetrators or

the respondents only briefly observed the interaction process. Adherent

This paradigm must be able to draw conclusions about something that arises

of the intrasubjective and intersubjective power of the observed symptoms.

Weber ((1864-1920) as a humanist figure in sociology and against

positivism, recognizing that social sciences must be concerned with phenomena

spiritual or ideal world, which is actually a characteristic of humans

which is not within the scope of the field of natural sciences. Approach to science

social is not like in the tradition of positivism which assumes life

social or society is like objects, but it is based on the reality of human consciousness so that efforts to
understand and interpret arise.

Weber emphasized that in the social sciences, we are dealing

with mental symptoms whose way of understanding is of course different

phenomena that can be explained by exact natural science

in general (Giddens, 1985: 164-179). Apart from approaching sociology

Through Kantian concepts, Weber has also tried to create a connecting line

debate between positivism and humanism. However, in Science as a

Vocation (1970: 51) Weber emphasized that sociology is a discipline that

value free. The research carried out must be accountable

scientific, therefore sociology is distinguished from politics and theology.

Apart from Weber, Dilthey also opposed social science scientism.

Dilthey also provided an important foundation for the flow of culture, namely the sciences

culture seeks to understand experience as a whole, without limitations. Sciences

culture transposes experience, trying to move objectivation

mentally returns to reproductive experience, then awakens

repeat the same experiences. Subject attitudes in cultural studies

is a verstehen that explains symbolic structure or meaning. With

verstehen does not want to explain the laws, but wants to discover them

the meaning of human products, such as history, society, etc

social interaction. Experience, expression and understanding are three important points

which according to Dilthey is the main subject of cultural studies (Hardiman, 1990: 148)

Schuzt, an Austrian scientist, helped lay the foundations of humanism

through a phenomenological approach. According to him, the subject-matter of sociology is

3. Social Behavior Paradigm

The problems of social science, in this case sociology according to this paradigm, are

behavior or behavior and its repetition (contingencies of reinforcement).

This paradigm focuses attention on individual behavior

takes place in an environment that causes consequences or changes to

subsequent behavior. The social behavioral paradigm firmly opposes the idea

social definition paradigm regarding the existence of freedom of thought or process

mentality that bridges human behavior with its repetition. Adherents of this paradigm consider freedom
of thought as a concept

which is metaphysical. This paradigm also has a negative view of the concept

social facts paradigm, namely social structures and institutions. Social behavior paradigm

Understanding human behavior is something very important. Draft

such as thinking, social structures and social institutions according to this paradigm can be

distracts us from human behavior.

The method that is often applied by this paradigm is good experimentation

in the laboratory and field. The experimental method allows researchers

carry out very strict control over the condition of objects and conditions

the surrounding environment. In this way, it is hoped that researchers will be able to create

assessment and measurement with a high degree of accuracy of the effects of changes in actor behavior
that are brought about intentionally

through this experiment. At the final level, researchers still have to create

conclusions from observing the behavior being observed.

Reference

Abdullah, M. Amin, 1996, Religious studies: Normativity or Historicity, Bibtaka

Student, Yogyakarta.
Berger, L. Peter, 1961, The Precious of Vision, Doubleday, New York

________, 1963, Invitation to Sociology, Doubleday, New York

________, 1969, The Sacred Canopy, Doubleday, New York

________, 1969, A Rumor of Angels, Doubleday, New York

________, 1977, Facing up to Modernity, Basic Book, New York

________, 1981, Sociology Reinterpreted: Essays on Methods and Fields of Work, LP3ES Jakarta

Understanding Paradigm

A paradigm is a set of basic beliefs, values, theories, concepts, and methods that form the basis of
understanding of a person or a scientific discipline. This paradigm becomes the basis for understanding
and research in certain fields and influences the way we see the world around us and how we process
information.

According to the Big Indonesian Dictionary (KBBI), paradigm has several different meanings. One of
them is a list of all word formations showing the conjugation and declination of the word.

Paradigm can also be interpreted as a model in scientific theory and a framework of thinking. In the
context of science, paradigm refers to a conceptual framework that forms the basis of understanding
and research in a particular field.

The existence of a paradigm can influence the way humans view the world around them and how they
manage information. Paradigms can also influence a person's way of solving problems and developing
theories in a field.

Types of Paradigms

1. Positivistic Paradigm: Focuses on scientific observation and measurement to search for objective
truth.

2. Constructivist Paradigm: Emphasizes that social reality is the result of joint construction by individuals
in different social groups, depending on their respective points of view.

3. Interpretative Paradigm: Understanding social reality as a result of interpreting the meaning given by
individuals and groups.

4. Critical Paradigm: Criticizes existing power and social structures with the aim of seeking social justice
and liberation.
5. Feminist Paradigm: Emphasizes the importance of understanding gender roles and gender equality in
social reality.

6. Postmodern Paradigm: Concrete that social reality is a social construction without any objective truth
or meaning.

7. Systemic Paradigm: Views social reality as a complex, interconnected system with reciprocal
interactions between its elements.

Paradigm Example

The following are examples of paradigms in everyday life:

* Positivistic Paradigm: When someone wants to seek an objective and accurate understanding of a
phenomenon or problem, they will use a data-based scientific approach.

* Constructivist Paradigm: When interacting with other people, individuals tend to understand that that
person's views and thoughts are influenced by different backgrounds, experiences and contexts. They
then try to build mutual understanding by respecting the other person's point of view.

* Critical Paradigm: When seeing social injustice or an unfair power structure, humans tend to criticize
and look for ways to change the structure to make it more fair for society.

* Interpretative Paradigm: When someone is discussing a problem with friends or family, they will
provide suggestions according to their own personal perspective. Each individual has a unique viewpoint
that can influence the advice given.

* Feminist Paradigm: When there is gender inequality in a social community, social activists will fight to
achieve gender equality and pay attention to the role of gender in society as a whole.

* Definition and understanding of paradigm according to experts

Etymologically, the term paradigm basically comes from Greek, namely from the word "para" which
means next to or next to, and the word "diegma" which means exemplary, ideal, model, or archetypal.
Meanwhile, terminologically, the term paradigm is defined as a view or perspective used to assess the
world and its natural surroundings, which is a general picture or perspective in the form of ways to
describe various kinds of very complex real world problems.