Pre-Paradigmatic Field Dynamics
The Concept
A field is “pre-paradigmatic” when it has significant open problems at the foundational level — contested definitions, unexamined assumptions, competing methods, no consensus on what counts as progress. Mechanistic interpretability is currently in this state.
Why It Matters
Pre-paradigmatic fields face characteristic challenges: debates often talk past each other because terms aren’t defined consistently; empirical work proceeds on unexamined assumptions; practical urgency can outpace conceptual clarity.
But this phase is also when philosophical partnership adds the most value. Concepts are still fluid enough to be clarified. Assumptions can be surfaced before they calcify into orthodoxy. The field can benefit from existing frameworks developed in adjacent domains.
How to Recognize It
Signs of a pre-paradigmatic field:
- Fundamental open problems remain unsolved
- Methods face significant critiques regarding tractability or soundness
- Core concepts (like “feature,” “mechanism,” “interpretability”) are used inconsistently
- Different research groups operate with different implicit definitions
- The field is described as needing to “mature”
Implications
For researchers in pre-paradigmatic fields: explicitly define your terms, acknowledge competing approaches, engage with foundational questions rather than treating them as settled. For fields wanting to accelerate past this phase: sustained interdisciplinary collaboration, especially with disciplines that specialize in conceptual clarification.