Good question. It's too long to list, sort of like naming every biological creature within 10 meters. But we can name the important ones. The stronger ones (politics, religion) tend to challenge others and lead to flame wars so I won't list them directly.

I think knowledge of the past is invaluable. They're solutions to problems and should be preserved. Some may not be useful now (e.g. tribalism, barter) but may be useful in future situations or in forging new ones.

Religion is a solid, immutable paradigm that can't be amended. It's remarkably fragile - the whole nature of religion is it must take priority over worldly hunger and riches. The ones that survive are interesting.

Similar things like charters matter too. But people challenge charters. Challenge gun law and women's suffrage long enough and it may be amended.

Economically, I believe productivity brings wealth and that it's not a solid amount you sit on. Too little wealth brings wars and starvation. Too much brings corruption. Britain did pretty well and Mali should have done better. A moderate amount is good.

Democracy works great. I think communism's failure was because Stalin etc went unchecked and the banning of entrepreneurship, but the way in which communism entered power made it incompatible with democracy.

Capitalism is flawed, it spawned communism, and will continue to spawn many other paradigms. Reaganomics isn't the problem, Reagan was just playing to a system that poorly regulates itself.

I think anarchy is the most efficient system with high trust but scales the worst. Tribalism and despotism works well too - it's no coincidence wars are won by despots. But it's not for all times, and it gets removed with weak communities and weak leaders. I'm not proposing we use these old systems either.

I think natural selection is an outdated methodology. It works but it's way too slow and we wouldn't have navel oranges if we left things to nature. The most powerful invention nature gave us is heirarchy and self-organization.

Humans are limited, by definition. Good question. It's too long to list, sort of like naming every biological creature within 10 meters. But we can name the important ones. The stronger ones (politics, religion) tend to challenge others and lead to flame wars so I won't list them directly.

I think knowledge of the past is invaluable. They're solutions to problems and should be preserved. Some may not be useful now (e.g. tribalism, barter) but may be useful in future situations or in forging new ones.

Religion is a solid, immutable paradigm that can't be amended. It's remarkably fragile - the whole nature of religion is it must take priority over worldly hunger and riches. The ones that survive are interesting.

Similar things like charters matter too. But people challenge charters. Challenge gun law and women's suffrage long enough and it may be amended.

Economically, I believe productivity brings wealth and that it's not a solid amount you sit on. Too little wealth brings wars and starvation. Too much brings corruption. Britain did pretty well and Mali should have done better. A moderate amount is good.

Democracy works great. I think communism's failure was because Stalin etc went unchecked and the banning of entrepreneurship, but the way in which communism entered power made it incompatible with democracy.

Capitalism is flawed, it spawned communism, and will continue to spawn many other paradigms. Reaganomics isn't the problem, Reagan was just playing to a system that poorly regulates itself.

I think anarchy is the most efficient system with high trust but scales the worst. Tribalism and despotism works well too - it's no coincidence wars are won by despots. But it's not for all times, and it gets removed with weak communities and weak leaders. I'm not proposing we use these old systems either.

I think natural selection is an outdated methodology. It works but it's way too slow and we wouldn't have navel oranges if we left things to nature. The most powerful invention nature gave us is heirarchy and self-organization.

I think the meaning of life is defined by one's death. The etymology of human is "burial". Non-burial is dehumanizing, the worst life is defined by having nobody at your funeral. This isn't a universal paradigm, but it's brought up in A Christmas Carol.

These are just the visible paradigms. There are many more that I take for granted but am not aware of. For example, the idea of property ownership or the concept of time. What if my goal was to increase wealth for others than for myself?