Karl Popper became a popular philosopher in the twentieth century, known for his emphasis on empirical falsification while studying the social sciences. He rejected previously popular views from the prewar era, namely Historicism, which focuses on only historical evidence in the observation of political and social events. In his book, Popper Selections, Popper vehemently opposes ideas such as historicism, collectivism, utopian principles, and the Marxian ideology. Popper’s emphasis on empirical falsification provides us the basis as to why he believes democracy proves to be essential to a state. His emphasis on individualism, piece-meal social engineering, interventionism and sovereignty highlight Popper’s direct opposition to Marx, which …show more content…
He asserts, “there cannot, of course, be any rational discussion in a school of this kind” (Popper 1985). Popper then places emphasis on the importance on the ‘rise of tradition,’ meaning a tradition in places of learning that encourages critical discussion and new ideas, perhaps even rewards them. Not only does Popper maintain that this rise of criticism is important, he also states that those being criticized should be tolerant of dissenting view points and seek to understand the opposition rather than rejecting it. Furthermore, Popper states, “the rationalist tradition, the tradition of critical discussion, represents the only practicable way of expanding our knowledge” (Popper 1985). These ideas of critical discussion and critical rationalism essentially serve as the thesis to Popper’s theory. Popper’s reliance on the testability, falsifiability, scientific methodology and accumulating data and theories serve as the main components of Popperism. The Popperian ideology seems to be directly in opposition to historicism. Popper defines historicism as “an approach to the social sciences which assumes that historical prediction is their principal aim, and which that assumes that this aim is attainable by discovering the ‘rhythms’ or the ‘patterns,’ the ‘laws’ or the ‘trends’ that underlie the evolution of history” (Popper
BonJour manages to defend the claim that a priori justification is necessary in order to avoid a severe, indefensible skepticism and demonstrates that any argument against a priori justification would undermine itself. This dialectical argument demonstrates that a denial of a priori justification is not only unsatisfactory, but impossible for the sake or argumentation. An empiricist critic could only appeal to pragmatism while accepting skepticism or surmount the impossible task of empirical justification of inference. This dialectical argument is by far BonJour's
The general understanding of democracy is that it is a state of leadership where citizens of a country participate equally either directly or by representative individuals in the establishment of laws, which run the society. However, like many other forms of leadership, democracy has its cons and may not give the citizens the necessary freedoms that they think they have. Different philosophers have different insights on democracy in terms of concepts such as liberty, which they embraced. This paper will look at Benjamin Barber and Joseph Schumpeter’s idea of democracy contrasting their definition in terms of citizenship, obligation, rights and duties of each individual in the society declaring whose idea of democracy creates a compelling vision (Terchek & Conte, 2001).
It is clear that according to the academic literature the more you connect knowledge for a pupil the better they learn. This mode enables learners to perceive new relationships, new models and create new systems and structures in their thinking. If pupil’s capacity for critical inquiry is to be furthered, topics being studied must be located in a broader societal context, and this would be better supported by cross-curricular activities. It is unleashing the creative potential of the
In addition to Aristotle, economist Joseph Schumpeter is also of importance because of his theories on democracy. In his book Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, Schumpeter explicated his new theory of democracy and defines it as the “rule of the politician.” With this new theory, he makes it clear that he is deviating from the classical notion of 18th century democracy presented by Rousseau and Bentham. Schumpeter writes that this traditional model of democracy could be defined as “the democratic method is that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions which realizes the common good by making the people itself decide issues through the election of individuals who are to assemble in order to carry out its will” (Schumpeter 250). His major critique on such democracy entails the assumption of a common good because he believes that people cannot achieve a conclusion of what the general will is. Thus, Schumpeter posits his own theory of democracy, which can be defined as follows: “that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people’s vote” (Schumpeter 269). This
Second argument by Sarah Fraas, an article titled, “Trans Women at Smith: The Complexities of Checking “Female”,” proves that gender bias is much more complicated than it appears. Trans Women at Smith college are required to prove gender markers with letters from teachers, health providers, etc. The problem with that is other women colleges accept all women no matter what gender they were assigned at birth. Gender identity has been a very contentious topic in United States. Whether you are against Trans women or women only colleges, we are not supposed to be the same. “We are all, myself included, a product of ideologies we have been taught to believe are common sense” (Fraas 685). We can disagree with someone’s opinions or ideology, but we
In the gruesome tragedy Macbeth, William Shakespeare explores how the temptation of man, in the form of witches, can “drain one dry as hay.” Temptation cannot create or conceive ideas, it can only act upon the existing flaws and subconscious intentions already planted in the victim's mind. The actions and behaviors that follow are the direct product of the initial act of allowing or preventing ‘gall’ to enter one's mind. This is demonstrated indirectly via character foil, of the two once mighty generals of Scotland's militant, Macbeth and Banquo. Both of these men are subject to the same rootless prophecy from the “Weird Sisters,” however due to their divergent ambitions, decisions, and allegiances in their state of mind is affected to varying degrees, ultimately regulating the lengths to which they will go to achieve their ambitions. If one is to avoid a “life forbid” then they must be able to restrain their “vaulting ambition” through means of “wisdom,” “valour,” and “allegiance clear” as demonstrated by Banquo.
There can be no doubt over the wide-ranging influence of Karl Marx’s theories on sociology and political thought. His concept of communism overcoming the socioeconomic pitfalls of capitalism has not been a theory that has seen the light of day in the way that he may have hypothesised. There have been many throughout history that have misrepresented Marx’s writing, which begs the question, if pure communism in the original Marxist sense is at all possible given that humanity appears to have an innate ‘need’ for hierarchy and a thirst for power.
This paper will critically evaluate the methodology used in Robert Putnam’s Making Democracy Work. By relying on what the methodological arguments that were taught this semester, this paper will discuss and evaluate in detail the various methodological strategies employed by the author. For the ‘Theory’ theme, this paper will examine casual mechanisms (and methodological individualism) topic, closely referencing the course reading Social Mechanisms by Peter Hedstrom and Richard Swedbeg. Next, for the ‘Measurement and Data’ theme, this paper will specifically examine the measurement validity and reliability topic, and will closely reference “Measurement validity: A Shared Standard for qualitative and Quantitative Research” by Robert Adcock and David Colllier. Finally, for the ‘Testing Theory with Data Theory’, this paper will be examining the history as an explanation topic, closely referencing “The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative and Counterfactuals in Historical Intuitionalism” by Giovanni Capoccia and Daniel Kelemen, as well as the relevant topic, Quantitative versus Qualitative Methods. The paper will start by summarizing the readings relevant to the topics of the themes, then delve into the pertinent methodology in Putnam’s book.
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels collaborated to produce The German Ideology, which was one of the classic texts generated by the two. Even though The German Ideology stands our as one of the major texts produced by the two, it was never published during Marx’s lifetime. This was a clear expression of the theory of history by Marx and its associated materialist metaphysics. One of the main reasons this text is a classic text by these philosophers is the fact that it introduces students to the basic tenets of the philosopher’s approach. Notably, Karl Marx produced The German Ideology in 1846 as a critique of George Friedrich Hegel and his followers in Germany. The philosophers sought to differentiate their concept of socialism from existing ones and exhibit how socialism emerges ordinarily from the social conflicts embedded in capitalism.
The following essay aims to discuss the inconsistencies between the inductivist and Popper’s points of view of science rationality of science in light of claims that the scientific method is inductive yet an inductive method is no. I think is rational to say that inductivist view of science has significant contradiction that Popper’s view solves. To support Popper’s view my argument will introduce the inductivist and falsificationsist views and I will focus in showing the issues of considered science as objective, scientific knowledge as proven and nature as uniform as well as the differences between inductivism and falsificationism to the creation of hypothesis.
In this essay I attempt to answer the following two questions: What is Karl Popper’s view of science? Do I feel that Thomas Kuhn makes important points against it? The two articles that I make reference to are "Science: Conjectures and Refutations" by Karl Popper and "Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research?" by Thomas Kuhn.
“There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry. There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. Our political life is also predicated on openness. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as [we] are free to ask what [we] must, free to say what [we] think, free to think what [we] will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress.”
When discussing the twentieth century in Europe everyone can agree that this period was a brutal one for the continent. A common opinion, many have is that despite all of the turmoil experienced throughout this period, including two world wars, the success of democracy as a style of government was never truly in doubt. This paper will go against this widely held belief, and argue that democracy’s success in this period was not written in stone.
“Truth is anything society deems it to be” is considerable right when our society believes that the only method of determining the “truth” is through laws and ideologies, which have been administered by the upper class Europeans. Our laws have been constructed to support the interest of the majority population, which supports their interest rather, then the general citizens. That being said, who created the legislation and administers laws, and who has the resources and inclination to challenge these laws? (Branch, 129). This question will be answered through the theories of Max Weber and Karl Marx who will be compared in regards to the construction of the legal knowledge, how law has become the truth in societies with the help of the
Churchill’s claim that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried” is deliberately provocative and intended to challenge the reader’s simplistic ideal that democracy is without faults. There are an estimated 114 democracies in the world today (Wong, Oct 3rd lecture). A figure that has increased rapidly in the last century not necessarily because democracy is the best form of government, but primarily for reason that in practice, under stable social, economic and political conditions, it has the least limitations in comparison to other forms of government. Be it the transparency of a democratic government or the prevalence of majority rule, all subdivisions of democracy benefit and hinder its