Two p’s are inseparable: p for paradigm and p for philosophy or paradox.
Paradigms play the most vital role to deal with our philosophical paradoxes.
Anything philosophical, must be paradoxical, i.e. physically or demonstratively undecidable.
We know, paradoxical notions are neither conclusively true, nor conclusively false until we personally accept them as true or false.
Argument is the tool of philosophy.
Whatever the issue, the very nature of argumentation is such that the issue is always counter-balanced by diversified, even contradictory arguments.
Arguments can not be true or false, but good or bad.
Plurality in arguments do happen for the prevailing differences in our point of views.
Primarily it seems that our questions are definite but ‘answer’s are indefinite or contradictory. Actually, our very questions are indefinite, that’s why, provided answers are indefinite.
To be able to raise a genuine question, signifies the very capacity to have a genuine answer, as well.
Every question do have some prior-fixed ‘answers’ and each answer do have some inherent questions.
In other words, if we think that we have definite questions, then we must have definite answers to those questions. It’s matter to find it out.
Is out there any final answer to any of our philosophical question? I think, NO.
We construct our epistemic comfort-zone according to our fundamental point of view about life and the world.