Academia at the shard end
📅 Tue 2 December 2025 at 04:31 GMT
- What Seth Godin taught me about my research
Yesterday, Seth Godin blogged about resistance to the adoption of generative AI. When I compared his post to mine on the same subject, I realised: Seth Godin is working at the next level! Let me explain why…
Seth likened the disruptive effect of AI today with disruptive effects when other paradigm shifts – such as email, television, smart phones, online shopping, and online learning – were first introduced. But he went much further than a mere comparison.
He gave a name to the phase in-between the fall of the old, and the establishment of the new: “the shard moment of transition.”
Like a shard of glass, this transition is jagged, rough, irregular, unstable and unpredictable, because the new technology is still being developed, and no-one knows exactly how it will turn out. The situation is a bit chaotic.
Any of us could have drawn the analogy between the advancement of AI and previous technologies. But by giving it a name – “the shard moment” – Seth created a conceptual infrastructure which allows everyone to talk about it, study it, and theorise it.
That’s what theoretical work does: it advances the field by generating new tools for thinking.
The lesson for my research
When Seth placed AI alongside previous disruptive technologies which caused a paradigm shift, I immediately also saw a parallel with my own research. Now, I don’t claim for a moment that my research into rhetorical density is as disruptive and impactful as the dawn of the AI age!
However, my development of quantitative methods to analyse rhetoric is a paradigm shift because rhetoric has almost always been assessed qualitatively until now. My PhD is therefore also a shard moment of transition!
Interestingly, Seth’s argument is supported by Thomas Kuhn’s 1962 book “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”. Kuhn argued that science does not advance incrementally, but through paradigm shifts where the entire conceptual framework changes and new standards, questions, methods, values are laid down.
The implication is that critical thinking alone can only produce advancement within a existing paradigm and is not itself sufficient to produce a paradigm shift, which requires a theoretical level thinking.
However, Kuhn’s work raises an interesting question. Most modern science is focused on incremental advancement within established paradigms. Is this because science has advanced to a level where genuine paradigm shifts are now rare? Or is today’s focus on incremental advancement, and the resistance to new theoretical work, the very reason for the lack of major paradigm shifts?
Both Seth’s and Kuhn’s thinking have given me a new perspective with which to understand some of the struggles I have faced in my research. At times I have felt frustrated that people – including academics – have struggled to understand my idea, and that I have not succeeded in explaining it clearly.
However, to use Seth’s shard analogy, I should expect that the transition I am trying to precipitate will have some sharp points. This is how a shard of glass is, after all.
My research is proposing rhetorical density as a new quantitative analytical tool, and not just applying existing qualitative frameworks. To quote Seth, “the pointy part” is the generative edge where discomfort is expected when a new theoretical framework, and new knowledge, are created.
My research is still an (early) work in progress, and time will tell what it amounts to. But my struggle to explain the work is – hopefully – a sign that I am knocking on the doors of a coming paradigm shift.
And that’s A Deeper Thought.
For readers who like to pause
A single idea, sent each morning, can shift how you see the day. If that appeals to you, feel free to subscribe below.
Join the conversation on 
Previously, on A Deeper Thought
 | Air Traffic Control (ATC) Principles for Area Leads in the Emergency Department 2 Apr 2026 |
 | Is Trump Serious??? 21 Feb 2026 |
 | “A Roman, a Hellene, and an Abbasid walk into a café…” 3 Feb 2026 |
 | Qaṣr: A tiny word, a big meaning, and an apology 2 Feb 2026 |
 | What My Mechanic Taught Me About Medicine 23 Dec 2025 |
 | Diagnosing a personality 8 Dec 2025 |
 | ChatGPT mistakes: a glitch in the matrix 7 Dec 2025 |
 | I label, therefore I am 6 Dec 2025 |
 | “I am not a donkey, I don’t have a field” 5 Dec 2025 |
 | Perfect is the enemy of done 4 Dec 2025 |
