I must admit that my expertise in the subject isn’t significant enough to debate the specifics described in the article. I must also admit, however, that I have taken a few history courses and they seem to coincide with what was discussed in “Theoretical Perspectives on the city”. What I truly enjoyed about the article was the history behind the compilation of knowledge that all became known as the “political economy paradigm”. One of the things I love about science is that there’s always room for new possibilities, and this article made me think of this “paradigm” as a concept being explored through the sciences. When these “scientists”/researchers ran out of questions to explore within the original paradigm they had developed with the help of The Chicago School, they were willing explore new horizons through the “political economy paradigm”. I agree when the author explained that new paradigms had to be created because, for example, what shapes society isn’t just competition for land or “natural laws”, in other words, things aren’t that simple. Which is why it was super interesting to see how the combination of paradigms created a more promising and stable field of study. Also, throughout the article, I constantly saw innovative ideas that helped explain many things around us.

Question: Which “belief” do you identify with the most? What’s one fact/idea that struck you the most while reading?