Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The Cartesian-Split-Mechanistic scientific paradigm that until recently functioned as the standard conceptual framework for sub-fields of developmental science (including inheritance, evolution, and organismic—pre-natal, cognitive, emotional, motivational, socio-cultural—development) has been progressively failing as a scientific research program. An alternative scientific paradigm composed of nested meta-theories with Relationism at the broadest level and Relational-Developmental-Systems as a mid-range meta-theory is offered as a more progressive conceptual framework for developmental science. Termed broadly the Relational-Developmental-Systems paradigm, this framework accounts for the findings that are anomalies for the old paradigm, accounts for the emergence of new findings, and points the way to future scientific productivity—and a more optimistic approach to evaluate-evidence-based applications aimed at promoting positive human development and social justice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Willis F. Overton (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: