|
|
| Line 91: |
Line 91: |
| | DOI = | | | DOI = |
| | OCLC = | | | OCLC = |
| }}</ref> Kuhn advances the idea that science is structured around paradigms and establishes a clear demarcation between science and pseudoscience, based on the presence of a shared paradigm. For him, the evolution of scientific progress is seen as a continuous curve, yet interrupted by discontinuities represented by paradigm shifts. | | }}</ref> ................... |
| | |
| Taking on the role of a skilled problem solver, the scientist is engaged in resolving these anomalies. These moments of discontinuity, or scientific revolutions, occur when the existing paradigm can no longer adequately interpret new anomalies, thereby pushing the scientific community towards the exploration and eventual adoption of new paradigms that better align with emerging observations.
| |
|
| |
|
| ===='''Kuhn's phases in Dentistry'''==== | | ===='''Kuhn's phases in Dentistry'''==== |
| Line 104: |
Line 102: |
| Kuhn, on the other hand, divides the evolution of a paradigm into five phases; this is a fundamental process for Masticationpedia, but to stay tuned with the project we will limit ourselves to describing the three most significant phases shared in the project and indicated in the index of the book: | | Kuhn, on the other hand, divides the evolution of a paradigm into five phases; this is a fundamental process for Masticationpedia, but to stay tuned with the project we will limit ourselves to describing the three most significant phases shared in the project and indicated in the index of the book: |
|
| |
|
| {|
| | It's almost taken for granted that Kuhn's scientific philosophy gives priority to discipline, since an anomaly within the genetic paradigm will be more easily recognized by a geneticist rather than a neurophysiologist. This concept, however, seems to contradict the epistemological evolution of Science, thereby making a detailed analysis of this apparent discrepancy appropriate................... |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| *<u>'''''Phase 2'''''</u>, or the Normal Science<br>For instance, in the second phase of Kuhn's paradigms, called "Normal Science," scientists are considered problem solvers engaged in strengthening the correspondence between the paradigm and natural reality. This phase is based on a set of fundamental principles established by the paradigm itself, which are not subject to dispute but are instead used to define the guidelines for future research projects. During this phase, the development of the necessary measurement tools to conduct experiments takes place, and the majority of the scientific literature is produced. The results obtained in this phase contribute significantly to the advancement of scientific knowledge. In normal science, both successes and failures occur; the latter are identified by Kuhn as "anomalies," i.e., events that contradict the prevailing paradigm.
| |
| |-
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| *<u>'''''Phase 4'''''</u>, or the '''Crisis of the Paradigm'''<br>In response to the crisis, there will be the formation of several new paradigms during this period. These emerging paradigms, therefore, will not originate from the successes of the previous theory, but rather from the rejection of the established models of the dominant paradigm. Continuing along this line, Masticationpedia will dedicate attention to the crisis of the masticatory rehabilitative paradigm, through the review of theories, theorems, axioms, currents of thought, and diagnostic research criteria. Subsequently, the focus will shift to the fifth phase.
| |
| |-
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| *<u>'''''Phase 5'''''</u>, or the '''Scientific Revolution'''<br>Phase 5 is characterized by the scientific revolution. During the period of extraordinary scientific activities, a debate will develop within the scientific community on which new paradigm to adopt. However, the prevailing paradigm will not necessarily be the "truest" or most efficient one, but rather the one that manages to arouse the interest of a sufficient number of scientists and earn the trust of the community. According to Kuhn, competing paradigms have nothing in common, not even the foundations, making them "incommensurable." The choice of paradigm, as mentioned, occurs on socio-psychological or biological bases, with younger scientists replacing the older ones. This battle between paradigms will resolve the crisis, the new paradigm will be named, and science will return to Phase 1. Following the same principle of Phase 4, Masticationpedia will introduce, in the chapter named "Extraordinary Sciences," a new paradigmatic model in the field of Masticatory System rehabilitation, examining its principles, motivations, scientific clinical experiences, and particularly, a radical change in the field of medical diagnostics. This change is fundamentally based on "System Inference," rather than symptom-based inference, assigning primary importance to the objectivity of data.
| |
| |}
| |
| | |
| It's almost taken for granted that Kuhn's scientific philosophy gives priority to discipline, since an anomaly within the genetic paradigm will be more easily recognized by a geneticist rather than a neurophysiologist. This concept, however, seems to contradict the epistemological evolution of Science, thereby making a detailed analysis of this apparent discrepancy appropriate. | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| ==Epistemology== | | ==Epistemology== |
| <center> | | <center> |
| Line 241: |
Line 223: |
| | DOI = | | | DOI = |
| | OCLC = | | | OCLC = |
| }}</ref> The critique is aimed at overly simplified statistical analyses, still present in numerous publications. This has stimulated a debate, sponsored by the American Statistical Association, which led to the creation of a special issue of "The American Statistician Association" titled "Statistical Inference in the 21st Century: A World Beyond p < 0.05", containing 43 articles by statisticians looking towards the future[16]. This special issue proposes new ways to communicate the significance of research findings beyond the arbitrary threshold of a P-value and offers guidelines for research that accepts uncertainty, is reflective, open, and modest in claims.<ref name="wasser">{{cita libro | | }}</ref> The critique is aimed at overly simplified statistical analyses, still present in numerous publications. This has stimulated a debate, sponsored by the American Statistical Association, which led to the creation of a special issue of "The American Statistician Association" titled "Statistical Inference in the 21st Century: A World Beyond p < 0.05", containing 43 articles........................ |
| | autore = Wasserstein RL
| |
| | autore2 = Schirm AL
| |
| | autore3 = Lazar NA
| |
| | titolo = Moving to a World Beyond ''p'' < 0.05
| |
| | url = https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00031305.2019.1583913
| |
| | volume =
| |
| | opera = Am Stat
| |
| | anno = 2019
| |
| | editore =
| |
| | città =
| |
| | ISBN =
| |
| | LCCN =
| |
| | DOI = 10.1080/00031305.2019.1583913
| |
| | OCLC =
| |
| }} 73, 1–19. </ref> The future will reveal whether these attempts to provide more solid statistical support to science, beyond traditional significance tests, will find resonance in future publications.<ref>{{cita libro
| |
| | autore = Dettweiler Ulrich
| |
| | titolo = The Rationality of Science and the Inevitability of Defining Prior Beliefs in Empirical Research
| |
| | url = https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01866/full
| |
| | volume =
| |
| | opera = Front Psychol
| |
| | anno = 2019
| |
| | editore =
| |
| | città =
| |
| | ISBN =
| |
| | LCCN =
| |
| | DOI = 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01866
| |
| | OCLC =
| |
| }} Aug 13;10:1866.</ref> This evolution aligns with Kuhn's concept of scientific progress, reflecting a reworking of some descriptive statistical content within the discipline.
| |
| |- | | |- |
| | | | | |
| *'''Interdisciplinarity''': <br>In the field of science policy, it is universally recognized that solving science-based problems requires an interdisciplinary research approach (IDR), as highlighted by the European Union's Horizon 2020 project.<ref>European Union, ''[https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/societal-challenges Horizon 2020]''</ref> Recent studies have explored the reasons for the cognitive and epistemic difficulties that researchers encounter in conducting IDR. One identified cause is the decline of philosophical interest towards the epistemology of IDR, attributed to the dominant "Physical Paradigm of Science." This paradigm limits the recognition of significant developments in IDR, both in the context of the philosophy of science and in the practice of research itself. In response, an alternative philosophical paradigm has been proposed, called the "Engineering Paradigm of Science," which offers alternative philosophical perspectives on fundamental aspects such as the purpose of science, the nature of knowledge, the epistemic and pragmatic criteria for the acceptance of knowledge, and the role of technological tools. Consequently, it highlights the need for researchers to make use of metacognitive support structures, called metacognitive scaffolds, to facilitate the analysis and reconstruction of the processes by which knowledge is constructed across different disciplines. In the context of IDR, such metacognitive scaffolds are essential for promoting effective communication between disciplines, allowing scholars to analyze and articulate how each discipline contributes to the construction of knowledge.<ref name=":0">{{cita libro | | *'''Interdisciplinarity''': <br>In the field of science policy, it is universally recognized that solving science-based problems requires an interdisciplinary research approach (IDR), as highlighted by the European Union's Horizon 2020 project.<ref>European Union, ''[https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/societal-challenges Horizon 2020]''</ref> Recent studies have explored the reasons for the cognitive and epistemic difficulties that researchers encounter in conducting IDR. One identified cause is the decline of philosophical interest towards the epistemology of IDR, attributed to the dominant "Physical Paradigm of Science." This paradigm limits the recognition of significant developments in IDR, both in the context of the philosophy of science and in the practice of research itself. In response, an alternative philosophical paradigm has been proposed, called the "Engineering Paradigm of Science,"................................ |
| | autore = Boon M
| |
| | autore2 = Van Baalen S
| |
| | titolo = Epistemology for interdisciplinary research - shifting philosophical paradigms of science
| |
| | url = https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6383598/
| |
| | volume =
| |
| | opera = Eur J Philos Sci
| |
| | anno = 2019
| |
| | editore =
| |
| | città =
| |
| | ISBN =
| |
| | LCCN =
| |
| | DOI = 10.1007/s13194-018-0242-4
| |
| | OCLC =
| |
| }} 9(1):16.</ref><ref>{{cita libro
| |
| | autore = Boon M
| |
| | titolo = An engineering paradigm in the biomedical sciences: Knowledge as epistemic tool
| |
| | url = https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28389261
| |
| | volume =
| |
| | opera = Prog Biophys Mol Biol
| |
| | anno = 2017
| |
| | editore =
| |
| | città =
| |
| | ISBN =
| |
| | LCCN =
| |
| | DOI = 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2017.04.001
| |
| | OCLC =
| |
| }} Oct;129:25-39.</ref>
| |
| |} | | |} |
|
| |
|
| Line 319: |
Line 246: |
| | DOI = 10.17096/jiufd.04646 | | | DOI = 10.17096/jiufd.04646 |
| | OCLC = | | | OCLC = |
| }} 51(3): 64–71. Published online 2017 Oct 2. PMCID: PMC5624148 - PMID: 29114433 </ref> Although the innovations mentioned are technological and methodological in nature, it is crucial to recognize that true scientific progress does not occur exclusively through "Incremental Innovations" or "Radical Innovations," but is fundamentally achieved through "Paradigmatic Innovations." | | }} 51(3): 64–71. Published online 2017 Oct 2. PMCID: PMC5624148 - PMID: 29114433 </ref> ............................ |
| | |
| In the strictest sense of the term, "Paradigmatic Innovations" are a change in thinking and awareness that spreads throughout all of humanity, affecting different social layers, from the Copernican revolution to the recent trend of approaching biological phenomena with a stochastic method.<ref>{{cita libro
| |
| | autore = Zhao XF
| |
| | autore2 = Gojo I
| |
| | autore3 = York T
| |
| | autore4 = Ning Y
| |
| | autore5 = Baer MR
| |
| | titolo = Diagnosis of biphenotypic acute leukemia: a paradigmatic approach
| |
| | url = https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776262
| |
| | volume =
| |
| | opera = Int J Clin Exp Pathol
| |
| | anno = 2010
| |
| | editore =
| |
| | città =
| |
| | ISBN =
| |
| | LCCN =
| |
| | DOI =
| |
| | OCLC =
| |
| }} Prepublished online 2009 Oct 10. PMCID: PMC2776262 - PMID: 19918331. 3(1): 75–86.</ref>
| |
| | |
| This epistemological context, which includes initiatives such as the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD), Evidence-Based Medicine, and others, is further explored in the Masticationpedia project. The latter aims to highlight the dynamics and dialectics of progress in the science of masticatory rehabilitations, emphasizing the anomalies that stimulate a change in thought and, consequently, a "Paradigmatic Innovation."
| |
| | |
| Before proceeding, it might be appropriate to observe a very concrete and significant case.
| |
|
| |
|
| == Malocclusion== | | == Malocclusion== |
| Line 480: |
Line 384: |
| It becomes clear that a deterministic approach to diagnosing such obvious occlusal incongruence might lead to considering both the crossbite and the open bite as both causes and effects of malocclusion, consequently suggesting orthodontic intervention to restore "Normocclusion". This mode of thinking would presuppose that the model (the masticatory system) should be "normalized" with respect to occlusion. Interpreted conversely, this would imply that the occlusal discrepancy is the cause of malocclusion and, by extension, pathology of the Masticatory Apparatus. (Figure 1a). | | It becomes clear that a deterministic approach to diagnosing such obvious occlusal incongruence might lead to considering both the crossbite and the open bite as both causes and effects of malocclusion, consequently suggesting orthodontic intervention to restore "Normocclusion". This mode of thinking would presuppose that the model (the masticatory system) should be "normalized" with respect to occlusion. Interpreted conversely, this would imply that the occlusal discrepancy is the cause of malocclusion and, by extension, pathology of the Masticatory Apparatus. (Figure 1a). |
|
| |
|
| In the context of a clinical case highlighting the presence of malocclusion, with particular attention to the unilateral posterior crossbite and anterior open bite, the importance of dialogue between dentist and patient emerges. This informative conversation is crucial not only for sharing the diagnosis and treatment options but also for understanding the patient's concerns, expectations, and desires. Here's how such a dialogue might unfold: | | In the context of a clinical case highlighting the presence of malocclusion, with particular attention to the unilateral posterior crossbite and anterior open bite, the importance of dialogue between dentist and patient emerges. This informative conversation is crucial not only for sharing the diagnosis and treatment options but also for understanding the patient's concerns, expectations, and desires...................... |
| | |
| | |
| '''Dentist:''' "Considering your malocclusion situation, which includes an open bite and unilateral posterior crossbite, treatment is recommended to improve both aesthetics and chewing functionality. Without intervention, you may experience future problems such as bruxism, swallowing difficulties, and potential postural issues."
| |
| | |
| '''Patient:''' "Absolutely not, doctor. I have no intention of undergoing any treatment. I may have an imperfect smile, but my chewing function is excellent. I eat without any issues, so I don't see why I should worry."
| |
| | |
| '''Dentist:''' "I understand that you feel comfortable with your current chewing condition. However, it's important to consider that some problems may not be immediately evident but could manifest over time, affecting not only oral health but also overall well-being."
| |
| | |
| '''Patient:''' "I appreciate your concern, doctor, but really, I have no problems chewing or swallowing. And as for bruxism or postural issues, I don't suffer from them. I'm also very physically active. For me, undergoing treatment that I don't feel is necessary would be excessive."
| |
| | |
| '''Dentist:''' "I understand your position. It's crucial that you feel comfortable with any decision made regarding your health. My role is to inform you about potential long-term implications and available treatment options. If you ever change your mind or need further information, know that I'm here to assist you."
| |
| <onlyinclude> </onlyinclude>
| |
| | |
| | |
| <center> | | <center> |
| <Div class="colour-button">......................[[Special:UserLogin&returnto=Introduction+Page|Read the full chapter]] | | <Div class="colour-button">[[Special:UserLogin&returnto=Introduction+Page|Read the full chapter]] |
| </div> | | </div> |
| </center> | | </center> |