A Comparative Analysis of Twelve Research Paradigms Across Six Knowledge Acquisitions and Twelve Sources of Knowledge: A Philosophical Discourse

Abstract

This study investigates whether a single research paradigm can dominate knowledge acquisition across empirical and interpretive domains or if a multi-paradigm approach is essential for achieving a holistic understanding. Twelve paradigms, including Positivism, Pragmatism, Hermeneutics, and Feminism, were evaluated across six domains: Science, Philosophy, History, Art, Religion, and Culture. The methodology employed comparative analysis, factor analysis, sensitivity testing, and inter-rater reliability assessment to quantify paradigm performance. The findings confirm Positivism's strength in empirical fields like Science and Philosophy but reveal its limitations in addressing ethical, cultural, and interpretive dimensions, where paradigms like Hermeneutics and Feminism excel. Pragmatism and Critical Realism bridge empirical rigor with interpretive depth, offering integrative solutions for interdisciplinary challenges. By applying statistical tools within a philosophical inquiry, this research highlights the necessity of humility and open-mindedness in selecting paradigms to address complex questions. The study concludes that no single paradigm suffices across all domains, advocating for a multi-paradigm approach to foster collaboration, inclusivity, and a more comprehensive understanding of knowledge production. These insights have implications for interdisciplinary research, education, and policymaking, emphasizing the importance of integrating diverse epistemological perspectives.