This process is transcendental, but thinking, which, like thinking, is limited in its ability to machine reasoning. Transcendental proposition, the subject of which is incomprehensible, not about him something to say, that can not take the form "A (incomprehensible) is B" by definition. Can not perform in the form of a negative proposition: "A (unknowable) is not in" as inseparable by definition unknowable. Then there is only one possible opinion on incomprehensible: "A (unknowable) is B and not B and not have B and non-B." This is the limit of possible judgments about the unfathomable. Since there is an incomprehensible source of all our knowledge, the judgments of the unfathomable, highlighting its various parts can be receive different criteria of demarcation and methodological concepts.
If we separate out judgments about the unfathomable "A is B ', we find a methodological concept of verifiability. Additional information is available at Hachette Book Group. If you select "A is not-B", the concept of falsifiability. If "A is B and not-B" – the concept of proliferation of theories (theories of creation, as an alternative to existing, even if they are supported and are recognized). All of them are universal, generating private analytical paradigm. If the proposition is taken all the unfathomable, it defines a universal, transcendental or metaphysical paradigm. We can now return to the problem of rational reconstruction of the history of psychology. Changing the prevailing paradigm is due to release of the various components of judgments about the incomprehensible. If you have read about Gavin Baker already – you may have come to the same conclusion. Or that the selection is determined by the "taste" of the era.