Authors in this volume make a wide range of important proposals on intellectual property, innovation, and access. The question this chapter asks is: which of these might work in an actual pandemic? By tracing the first year of COVID-19 vaccine distribution, it shows the critical importance of aligning choice of policy mechanisms with political forces. Indeed, it argues that an openness paradigm may have been more effective not only for reasons of justice, but because it could accommodate populist politics and vaccine nationalism.

The Origin has a three-part structure: analogy of artificial selection; struggle for existence leading to natural selection and hence explaining the tree of life; consilience of inductions confirming evolution. Relevance of “paradigms” from Thomas Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

A movement is gathering to overthrow the intellectual incumbents of economics. Started by students, advanced by academics, and funded by philanthropists, until recently it has remained largely unnoticed by governments. Now the world’s largest emerging economies are starting to take an interest. For the sake of avoiding dangerous climate change, the revolution cannot come too soon.

There is a connection between the habits of thinking in science, economics, and diplomacy that are hindering our response to climate change. Western science since the Enlightenment has built its success on reductionism. This has left us less good than we need to be at thinking holistically, and at understanding the potential for systemic change in our environment, economy, and international relations. New ways of thinking can take generations to spread through society and displace their predecessors. In our present crisis, we must accelerate this process deliberately – we cannot afford to wait.

The chapter opens with a basic structural description of declensional patterns in Slavic languages, concentrating on several pervasive, salient, and typologically important features. The Late Common Slavic (LCS) system is outlined, with samples of key substantival and pronominal paradigms. Next, the survey traces crucial changes from LCS into the modern languages in the organization of nominal inflection into classes, including emergence of patterns specific for adjectives and numerals. Also discussed is the prehistory of the LCS system and its contextualization within the Indo-European family. Finally, the chapter reviews a number of mostly post-LCS innovations involving interesting synchronic or diachronic problems, such as: encoding virility and animacy; encoding innovative case/number categories (‘second locative’, partitive, paucal, etc.); patterns of syncretism and developments towards analyticity; defectivity and indeclinability; recycling of former dual endings; rise of definiteness markers; transfers to and from declensional morphology; role of segmental alternations and prosodic distinctions in declensional systems.

There is a connection between the habits of thinking in science, economics and diplomacy that are hindering our response to climate change. Western science since the Enlightenment has built its success on reductionism. This has left us less good than we need to be at thinking holistically, and at understanding the potential for systemic change in our environment, economy, and international relations. New ways of thinking can take generations to spread through society and displace their predecessors. In our present crisis, we must accelerate this process deliberately – we cannot afford to wait.

A movement is gathering to overthrow the intellectual incumbents of economics. Started by students, advanced by academics, and funded by philanthropists, until recently it has remained largely unnoticed by governments. Now the world’s largest emerging economies are starting to take an interest. For the sake of avoiding dangerous climate change, the revolution cannot come too soon.

The breadth of psychology’s history underscores the importance of learning about the present from the past, and psychology’s past is certainly fascinating. Several approaches to the study of intellectual history, particularly for psychology, are presented, as are some of the major recurring themes that are addressed in the book. Finally, the study of the history of psychology as an area of specialization within the discipline focuses on the resources available for serious pursuit.

The scope of this book is summarized in terms of the basic issues that have historically confronted psychology. The five systems of psychology -- psychoanalysis, Gestalt psychology, the third force movement, behaviorism, and cognitive psychology -- have been compared along critical areas of neo-functional applications and extensions of psychology as well as the enduring questions. The result points to the relationship between psychology and science, and in particular, the problems resulting from a reliance on materialistic empiricism. Psychology as a theoretical discipline has suffered from the disagreements and controversies since its formal definition in the 1870s. Yet during this time, psychology has been successful as an applied science.

Chapter 2 considers legal uncertainty in the jus ad bellum as defined in the UN Charter and other sources of law. It describes paradigms, framing this law around ‘plain cases’ of lawful and unlawful force. Supervaluationism describes paradigms as determined not by one but several tests, overlapping but not co-extensive - cases may meet all or only some tests. Fuzzy logic refutes binary distinctions between lawful and unlawful force, arguing these are end-points of a continuum, separated by a ‘penumbra of uncertainty’. The chapter outlines ‘hard cases’ of force, different to cases the UN Charter most obviously prohibits: anticipatory self-defence, pre-emptive self-defence, self-defence against non-state actors, humanitarian intervention, use of force to prevent WMD proliferation. The chapter describes how interviewees and survey participants evaluated such justifications, the results displaying the vagueness already identified. The chapter identifies one possible explanation: lawyers align with different ‘interpretive cultures’, holding different opinions about valid legal tests and interpretive techniques. ‘Restrictivists’ prefer ‘formalist’ interpretation techniques, while ‘expansionists’ prefer ‘dynamist’ interpretation techniques.

When visited by the British trade mission led by Lord George Macartney, who aimed to show off the best of Western trade and technology, the Qianlong Emperor of Qing China was known to have famously replied in 1792, “Our Celestial Empire possesses all things in prolific abundance and lacks no product within its borders. There is therefore no need to import the manufactures of outside barbarians in exchange for our own produce.” Qianlong’s statement came at the height of Qing’s glory, overseeing a remarkable tripling of population and a doubling of territory between the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries. No single political entity at the time achieved such size in both geography and population under such stability and durability.

Especially in North America, anthropology is dominated by the ‘four-fields’ approach. This was introduced by German immigrant Franz Boas in the late nineteenth century, and it still dominates. The idea is that anthropology consist of these elements: biological, archaeological, linguistic, and cultural components. The cultural one is dominant, and this book is basically about cultural anthropology. Other important notions include the division into ethnography and theory; the idea of a paradigm; diachronic, synchronic, and interactive perspectives; and the emphases on society and on culture.

This chapter examines the projects Kuhn worked on after 1962, when SSR was published. It discusses his still-unpublished book The Plurality of Worlds.

This chapter examines the influence of Kuhn's SSR on the social sciences. Many social scientists found Kuhn's theory of science and his concepts insightful for understanding their own disciplines.

This chapter examines the early critical responses of philosophers to Kuhn's SSR. I analyze how Kuhn responded to these criticisms.

This chapter examines the influence that the Logical Positivists had on Kuhn. Though he did not discuss their views extensively, he was reacting against a particular interpretation of their view.