A paradigm’s value is judged by usefulness relative to alternatives, not completeness.

Evidence

The test of its meaningfulness and usefulness is not whether it accounts for everything that is happening in global politics. Obviously it does not. The test is whether it provides a more meaningful and useful lens through which to view international developments than any alternative paradigm. In addition, no paradigm is eternally valid. While a civilizational approach may be helpful to understanding global politics in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, this does not mean that it would have been equally helpful in the mid-twentieth century or that it will be helpful in the mid-twenty-first century. — Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the…, 24 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

We found instead that sacred values were associated with increased activity in the left temporoparietal junction (TPJ) and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (VLPFC), regions previously associated with semantic rule retrieval. This suggests that sacred values affect behavior through the retrieval and processing of deontic rules and not through a utilitarian evaluation of costs and benefits. — Scott Atran and Jeremy Ginges, Sacred Values and Cultural Conflict, 89 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Frameworks for economic change should be judged by theoretical usefulness, not absolute truth. — Greta R. Krippner, The Financialization of the American…, 129; Analytical paradigms should be judged by relative utility, not completeness or permanence. — Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the…, 24; A good decision is measured by weighing of interests and durability, not result — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1306 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Analytical paradigms should be judged by relative utility, not completeness or permanence. #corroborates (0.97) — Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the…, 24
• Sacred values engage deontic rule processing, not utilitarian cost-benefit calculation #complicates (0.71) — Scott Atran and Jeremy Ginges, Sacred Values and Cultural Conflict, 89