Natural Science
NATURAL SCIENCE INTRODUCTION Perhaps the most obvious characteristic of science today is its success. This is both practical and theoretical. Science has changed our lives considerably, both for better and for worse, since today much of our technology is the product of scientific knowledge. Its great prestige has always lain in the belief that science provides us with a uniquely secure form of knowledge, firmly founded in objective reality. People say: "Scientists have proved..." Unfortunately, things are not so simple. Science is one of those terms, which we are sure all we understand and which raises no problems until we begin to look at the matter more closely. There is no precise, commonly accepted idea of what constitutes science: * There is no general agreement as to exactly which intellectual disciplines should count as science. * It is commonly held that what makes science distinctive has nothing directly to do with the subject matter, which is investigated, but that it is the method, which is used to acquire scientific knowledge, which gives to science its special authority. But then, as we shall see, there is no commonly accepted account of the methods that scientists must follow in order to obtain results that are properly scientific. THE ORIGINS OF SCIENCE All ancient peoples had some knowledge of agricultural and building techniques, of healing herbs and
Critically assess the value of the models of Frank, Rostow and Clark-Fisher in our understanding of development issues.
Critically assess the value of the models of Frank, Rostow and Clark-Fisher in our understanding of development issues. There are a great number of differences between the models of Frank, Rostow and Clark-Fisher. For example, the Clark-Fisher sector model and W.W. Rostow's modernisation theory are merely temporally based models of development. However, Frank's dependency theory contains elements of both temporal and spatial factors. There is also the highly significant division to consider between dependency theories and modernisation theories. Dependency theories are the theories which build upon the idea that the rate of development of a country is largely a consequence of its relationships with other countries. On the other hand, modernisation theories are theories that build upon the idea that the rate of development of a country is largely to do with internal structures, government and culture of that country. According to Frank's dependency theory, countries can become more frequently dependent on powerful colonial powers. He believed that as the more powerful country exploits the resources of the weaker colony, the colony becomes more dependent. Frank in 1971 described the effect of capitalist development on many countries as "the development of underdevelopment". The position of the weaker country, in lacking sufficient resources, put the stronger countries in
What did Karl Marx mean by 'exploitation' in a capitalist economic system?
What did Karl Marx mean by 'exploitation' in a capitalist economic system? Give contemporary examples of 'exploitation' and assess why it has not (yet) brought about the demise of capitalism? Exploitation can be defined as to make use of someone, by playing on some venerability or weakness, for personal accomplishment. In terms of exploitation within a capitalist system, Marx explored the control and authority within this structure, and the relationship between those with the power towards those who were made to follow orders. In order to examine whether exploitation exists presently within the current system, the system of capitalism and exploitation have to be examined thoroughly. By doing so, it will be clear whether Marx's idea of the eventually collapse of capitalism, can be justified. Capitalism was defined by Marx as a system where the fundamental principle is to increase exchange value of commodities, in order to gain profit. The main factors behind capitalism involve free enterprise and freedom to produce. Goods are produced in order to be exchanged for commodities, and their exchange value is measured in the form of money. Capitalists own the means of production, and the workers sell their labour to them. Marx believed that the tendency and the result of the capitalist mode of production are steadily to increase the productivity of labour. Hence it also increases
Stages to Germany from 1918 to 1919
Describe the stages by which Germany changed in the course of 1918 and 1919 from a monarchy to a democratic Republic. From September 1918 to early 1919 the nature and structure of the Weimar Republic took shape following the collapse of the Kaiser's Germany. There were five key stages which changed Germany into a democratic republic. These were the creation of a parliamentary monarchy; the creation of a parliamentary republic; the freezing of the revolution; the suppression of the Spartakist revolution; and the final stage in turning Germany into a democratic republic: the formal establishment of the new regime. The first step in this change was the creation of a parliamentary monarchy. The second Reich had not been a true democracy, despite the existence of the Reichstag. The Kaiser appointed the chancellor and Wilhelm II was the only person who could remove him. It was clear to the German leaders in the autumn of 1918 that Germany had no hope in winning the war. By now the main priority was getting Germany out of the fighting with the least amount of damage possible and with no humiliation at all of the war spilling over onto German soil. Despite the fact that the new chancellor Prince Max of Baden, appointed by Wilhelm II, had soon gone into serious negotiation with the Allies, the situation for the German government, both home and abroad, was growing increasingly
Are concepts of left and right meaningful outside the European context
Are concepts of left and right meaningful outside the European context?' The traditional left-right axis has since the finish of World War One and particularly since the end of World War Two dominated not just European politics but world politics as the political right and the political left came to represent democracy and the side of 'good' and anti-democracy and supposed 'evil'. Despite the apparent contradictions, the socialist left (of varying degrees of extremity) commanded a significant amount of electoral support in most mainland European countries. Since the end of the Cold War era the concepts of left and right in politics has changed somewhat. In considering whether these concepts are meaningful in a non-European context, three key topics need to be examined. Firstly, the political left and the political right and their interrelationship need to be defined as concretely as possible. Secondly, it has to be examined whether these concepts have any meaning in politics today and finally, we need to decide then if the concepts are meaningful outside of the European context. This will be achieved through the broad study of six national political systems within and outside of Europe. The traditional left-right axis refers to the simple attempt by political commentators to classify the mainly economic (but also social) philosophy of individuals and political parties on a
Behavioural Theories.
Bob Heaney Behavioural Theories When it comes to health and fitness, the British (in particular we in the west coast of Scotland) are not renowned for our enthusiasm on the matter. The Scottish Executive is now realising however that this is an issue which needs addressed, and quickly. The strain upon the National Health Service and the deteriorating health of the nation is a worry, and if we are to install suitable values in the population then we must learn how to motivate them. Leading behavioural psychologists have devised a number of motivational and behavioural theories, and this helps us begin to understand the way people behave, and consequently why they behave the way that they do. Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) was one of these psychologists, who produced a piece of work which he named his "hierarchy of needs". Maslow suggested that there are five sets of goals, which may be called basic needs. Mans primal need is for survival, and the simple physiological needs are thirst, hunger, shelter, sleep and sex. Not necessarily in any particular order however, as the need for a drink may at times overtake the need for food- but if you found yourself with someone's hands around your throat, then needing a thirst quencher would be quickly forsaken for the need to breathe! Secondary to survival is the need for security. This reflects our desire to be free from danger,
Define the difference between negative and positive freedom, outline the implications of the state in each.
Tuesday, 15 October 2002 Jad Salfiti A1 Politics Define the difference between negative and positive freedom, outline the implications of the state in each In his "Two Concepts of Liberty", Isaiah Berlin distinguished between two theories of liberty; Negative and Positive freedom. The negative view advocates freedom with regard to independence of an individual from interference by other persons, institutions or governments, and fundamentally the absence of eternal restrictions or constraints upon the individual. Berlin argued that "I [he] am normally said to be free to the degree to which no man or body of men interferes with my activity. Political liberty in this sense is simply the area within which a man can act unobstructed by others", it thus follows that mere incapacity to attain a goal is not lack of political freedom. If freedom refers in some way, to the absence of eternal constraints upon the individual, a commitment to liberty implies that definite limits be placed upon both law and Government. Negative Freedom, therefore implies that Government should similarly be restricted to a 'minimal' role, amounting in practice to little more than the maintenance of domestic order and personal security. For this reason, advocates of negative freedom have usually supported minimal state intervention and sympathised with laissez-faire capitalism. This is not to say,
How Far Does the System for Electing the President Fulfil Democratic Criteria?
How Far Does the System for Electing the President Fulfil Democratic Criteria? In a democratic society such as the United States, there are several functions of elections, none more so than to allow democracy to prevail, hence the people of the country are given the opportunity, through voting, to decide who becomes president, thus everyone has a say in deciding who leads them. Understandably, there is a whole range of criteria to judge how democratic the US election system is. In short, the system is one that currently falls short of fully fulfilling the democratic criteria, however it does offer a relatively democratic system as a whole. A fundamental requirement of democracy is that of voter participation. The USA does offer men and women of all ethnic backgrounds the opportunity to participate in presidential elections, and as such this is a commendable asset to US democracy. On the other hand, participation levels are alarmingly low. In the 2000 presidential election approximately half of those eligible to vote actually bothered. This places much doubt on how representative the elected George W Bush really was. There is evidently a part, or a number of parts, to the electoral system which discourages people from voting hence such a low turnout. A major reason is voter apathy. Some would argue that there are too many unnecessary elections in the USA which has caused a
Deontology- a theory based purely on obligation or duty.
Andria J. Williams Phil 022 0-28-03 Exam #2 Deontology- a theory based purely on obligation or duty It cannot be agreed upon that actions considered right are deemed as such solely because the corollary of that action is determined to be good. Consequentialism, a well-known theory of the right, suggests that the consequences of an action determine whether that action is considered as good or bad. However, the consequentialist theory does not leave room for special circumstances and ultimately leads to alienation. It is for this reason that deontology proves to be not necessarily right, yet one of the most compelling and interesting theories. Deontology is a theory of the right, which suggests that people have an obligation to behave in a specific way towards others. In other words, rules must be followed at all times. When broken down into the derivative words, the word "deontology", is compiled of the Greek word "deon", meaning duty. For instance, it is considered a moral duty not to kill, lie, or perform any other like tasks that violate moral written or unwritten laws, even if it produces a good consequence. This part of deontology protects the moral character of a person, thus refusing to impose on one's personal belief or morale. One such situation where this theory may become relevant can be found within the following scenario. A white female has been
The argument that democracies do not fight one another is a relatively easy
Democratic peace is presently a theory that has come under fire from many individuals due to the complex nature in which it is applied to nations and their handling of foreign affairs. There are currently two accepted arguments: (1) Democracies do not fight one another because they are self-organizing systems and are therefore fundamentally distinct from other states, and (2) they are as prone to conflict with no democracies or quasi-democracies as no democracies are with one another. These views on democratic peace are one of a "... dyadic effect, which implies that democracies are only more peaceful with one another, and not a monadic effect, which would mean that democracies are more peaceful in their relations with all countries" (Rousseau 512). The argument that democracies do not fight one another is a relatively easy, while at the same time complex concept to argue. Many researchers try to argue that democratic peace is reliable based solely on liberal and democratic norms. It is not that norms are not unimportant; it is just that they are alone unable to explain why peace continues between democratic nations. The concept behind the statement democracies do not fight one another is supported by the fact that when two democracies confront one another in conflicts of interest, they are able to effectively apply democratic bargaining in their interaction, which then
