Changes

{|

{|

|-

|-

| align="right" width="250" |<small>''<translate><!--T:38--> The black swan symbolizes one of the historical problems of epistemology: if all the swans we have seen so far are white, can we decide that all the swans are white?</translate><br><translate><!--T:39--> Really?</translate>''</small>

| width="250" align="right" |<small>''<translate><!--T:38--> The black swan symbolizes one of the historical problems of epistemology: if all the swans we have seen so far are white, can we decide that all the swans are white?</translate><br><translate><!--T:39--> Really?</translate>''</small>

| align="center" |[[File:Black_Swan_(Cygnus_atratus)_RWD.jpg|175px|center]]

| align="center" |[[File:Black_Swan_(Cygnus_atratus)_RWD.jpg|175px|center]]

|-

|-

|}

|}

==<translate><!--T:74--> Disciplinarity ''vs.'' Interdisciplinarity</translate>==

==<translate><!--T:74--> P-value ''vs.'' Interdisciplinarity</translate>==

<translate><!--T:75--> Given the above, on a superficial view of the epistemic evolution of the Science, the two aspects of disciplinarity ("''Physics Paradigm of Science''", highlighting the anomaly) and Interdisciplinary ("''Engineering Paradigm of Science''", metacognitive scaffold), might seem to be in conflict with each other; in reality, however, as we are just going to see right in this chapter, they are two sides of the same coin because both tend to generate "Paradigmatic Innovation" without any conflict at all.</translate>

<translate><!--T:75--> Given the above, on a superficial view of the epistemic evolution of the Science, the two aspects of disciplinarity ("''Physics Paradigm of Science''", highlighting the anomaly) and Interdisciplinary ("''Engineering Paradigm of Science''", metacognitive scaffold), might seem to be in conflict with each other; in reality, however, as we are just going to see right in this chapter, they are two sides of the same coin because both tend to generate "Paradigmatic Innovation" without any conflict at all.</translate>