Explain the concept of incommensurability in relation to paradigms, (c) indicate how paradigms do or do not contribute to progress of knowledge, and (d) illustrate with one or more exemplar(s) from the communication discipline. Question. Paradigm Map(s): There are over a dozen paradigm maps of the scholarly landscape in the syllabus, and some among the readings for the course. Identify or construct your own defensible paradigm “map” of the current territory of the communication field, focusing at least as much, if not exclusively, on theoretical paradigms as opposed to methodological paradigms. You may use existing maps or any other “map” including one of your own, but you should seek to emphasize your clarifications, extensions, or modifications. How satisfactorily does your map describe the state of social sciences and/or scholarly disciplines? Why? Privilege and Progress: A central issue in the discipline (and throughout the course and semester) is whether or not there is something “progressive” about the role of theory, and the way in which scholarly inquiry operates, and if so, from which epistemological perspectives or paradigms such progress can be determined. From such a yardstick as progressiveness arises a related question: What, if anything, “privileges” the scholarly voice, relative to intuitive, popular, aesthetic, political, or other less scholarly approaches to knowledge claims? So: (a.i) Indicate how progress is achieved and known, if at all, and if unknown, why; and (a.ii) What role does “theory” play in this process if any, and if not any, why not. Further, (b) specify what, if anything, ‘privileges’ the scholarly voice, and if nothing, then how scholarly activity should be viewed and contextualized in the academy and in society. Finally, (c) it is important to consider if your answer applies only to “science” or also to more “interpretive,” “constructivist,” “rhetorical/critical” and/or performative perspectives and practices Whether science is making any progress, and if so – how science is making progress.Critical vs. Scientific theorizing: If the primary function of traditional “scientific” theory is to explain, and the primary function of “critical” theory to critique toward needed change, identify, compare and contrast at least three additional ways in which these types of theory differ or are similar.