Crosscut: new paradigms progress

The idea of a 'new paradigm' often holds a powerful, almost irresistible appeal, promising a clean break from the past and a swift path to progress. Yet, a closer look reveals that what appears revolutionary often stands on deep foundations, or even risks neglecting crucial elements. What's striking is how this pattern plays out across vastly different domains. Scott Alexander, writing in Astral Codex Ten, delves into the technical evolution of AI, questioning whether the pursuit of Artificial General Intelligence truly demands a complete paradigm shift, or if continuity is more essential. Parallel to this, Yusuf Serunkuma, in Africa Is a Country, critiques the push for STEM education as a 'new paradigm' for development in Africa, arguing that overlooking the humanities can undermine holistic societal advancement. Together, these pieces invite a thoughtful reconsideration of what true progress entails.What jumps out from Scott Alexander's argument is the way it dismantles the comforting notion of a distant, radically discontinuous technological leap. The piece suggests that even significant advances, like AGI, might emerge from evolutionary steps within existing frameworks, challenging the assumption that a "new paradigm" necessarily implies a complete break from the past or a long delay. It frames the wait for a truly novel breakthrough as a potential misdirection, urging a re-evaluation of how close and continuous future progress might actually be. Read alongside Alexander, Yusuf Serunkuma’s critique of educational policy in Africa takes on a complementary resonance. Where Alexander questions the *necessity* of radical discontinuity in technological progress, Serunkuma argues against its *desirability* in societal development. The push for STEM education as a standalone "new paradigm" for African progress, Serunkuma observes, risks severing the "branches" of technical skill from the "roots" of humanities and historical understanding. This isn't merely an academic debate; it points to the specific argument that technical expertise, divorced from its political and social context, is inherently incomplete and potentially misdirected. Both pieces, in their distinct domains, reveal a shared skepticism towards the simplistic allure of a "new paradigm" as a panacea, instead highlighting the persistent, often overlooked, importance of continuity and foundational knowledge.What lingers after these discussions is a sense that the path forward, whether in technology or society, is rarely a clean break. The allure of a 'new paradigm' can obscure the enduring value of what already exists, or the slow, iterative work that truly builds. Progress, it seems, often thrives not on radical discontinuity, but on a deeper engagement with continuity and foundational understanding. The question these two pieces leave behind is this: when faced with the promise of a revolutionary shift, how does one discern true innovation from a mere rebranding of the essential?Sources:Astral Codex Ten: New Paradigms Won't Save YouAfrica Is a Country: Branches without roots