Institutional Details

Published: 2019-05-27 11:30:00
1331 words
5 pages
12 min to read
letter-mark
B
letter
University/College: 
Type of paper: 
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

QUESTION 1: Which Perspective discusses about the world by authors (below), which on one critically relates to what they propose as alternatives?

Karen Barad in her works discusses the world perceptively through her concept and theory of Agential Realism. In this theory, she explains that the world is composed of a myriad number of phenomena that are ontologically inseparable from the agencies that act in interaction with each other in the world (Barad 2000). Intra-action between phenomena of the world that was proposed by Karen Bard was significant in challenging the individualistic metaphysics. According to Barad, the world is in such a way that the things and objects in it do not come after the interactions of the phenomena of the world but they emerge as a result of particular interactions of the phenomena of the world (Barad 2000).

Karen Balad differed with the actor-network theory by saying that the objects of the world are not the efforts of human beings in assembling but rather they are a result of the materiality of the existence of both the human and the non human in the world. Agential realism perspective was believed to be a way of bringing a clear understanding of the politics, ethics as well as acts based on observation and other kinds of knowledge.

Donna Haraway also discusses the feminism as a theory that is based on the liberation of the female gender from oppression by the male gender in the societies of the world (Haraway 2003). She discusses the world saying that the world is a slavery ground for the female gender and for it to be a better place, the female gender have to be given equal attention and be allowed to be actively involved in the running of the affairs that affect her life in the society.

In general, these authors have written a lot on the theory of feminism and the social life in the societies of the world. They propose that the alternative action to save the earth is to stop the mistreatment and the marginalization of the female gender in the society so as to make the world a better place (Braidotti 2011). They critically evaluate the nature of the gender inequality embraced by the world and seek to present a solution to the problems of the world with regard to the marginalization of the female gender in decision making and affairs of the states. They try to do this by putting clear the roles of the female gender in the contemporary society in an effort to change the way things are done in the world. The feminist theory that is greatly explored by these authors greatly discusses the world on the basis of the oppression and discrimination as well objection of the that is imposed on the women in the world and how these mistreatment and awkward ideology derails the well being of the world.

QUESTION 2: Positivism

Positivism is a concept that refers to systems that are based on empirical evidence rather than mere speculation. The concept of positivism means that knowledge is supposed to be based on facts and experience in life and not just speculations that are baseless. This concept was shaped by a French philosopher by the name August Comte who insisted the use of scientific facts and observations in the society that are based to facts that have been observed through experimentation and observation of real facts (Comte 1975). Comte and his positivism advocated for fact-finding in the social scenarios and scientific approach to issues in the society. He proposed that positivism will help to bring a positive way of dealing with issues by applying theoretical concepts and ideas based on empirical scientific evidence to solve issues in the society (Comte 1975.

Comte insisted that theoretical and scientific claims were very important in making sure that the actions of people in their social life are guided on the basis of evidence and not mere speculation and theretofore will be error free. The concept of positivism therefore in short concerned application of scientific and theoretical approaches top social problems in the society. This is because the positivism approach was based on facts that were found through experiments and observations that revealed actual details about the lives of people on earth (Wright 1986).

The negative aspect of positivism is the repudiation of metaphysics. Te positivists were totally anti-metaphysical and they refuted the speculations that were made on the reality of things in the world. The misunderstanding and criticism of the positivism concept came after the world war when people started criticizing positivism on grounds that it could not defend the ideas that it claimed were based on facts (Laudan 1996). As a result, it became highly criticized for being so anti-metaphysical and failing to defend ideas that it hanged on concerning reality of objects and based on the fact finding advocated by positivists.

QUESTION3: What is Popper and Kuhns various Scientific perspective? What makes them different? Is there something problematic or overlapping in the respective description?

Popper developed a philosophical ideology that advocated for a hypothetical method that based on the provision of proof of ideas and issues in the society (Fuller 2003). He wanted to disapprove the positivists who thought that hypothetical approaches to probing of issues in an effort to find reality with regard to human life and general existence of things was not adequate to provide facts. He therefore presented a hypothetical ideology that was a bounding factor to pseudoscience and was guidance to working research (Mosley 1975). Popper based his ideology on intuition, observation and deduction. He therefore put a clear guideline on how scientific research should be done and cautioned on the falsification of the hypothesis to present false results in research

Popper emphasized the confirmatory procedures to the hypothesis testing in research. He insisted that the hypothesis can be falsified in a scientific research to give false impressions of the variables under study and therefore result to misleading out comes. He therefore insisted that the confirmation of the procedures used in falsifying the hypothesis is the best indicator of a credible research.

On the other hand, Kuhn was very descriptive of how science works. He said that science does not develop evenly and accumulatively but through radical ideologies and revolution of the existing ideologies and procedures. Moderation of the radical ideologies that bring about revolution was therefore very important according to Kuhn in ensuring that scientific evidence presented remains credible.

The idea s of Popper and those of Kuhn were overlapping in the sense that they both presented a challenge to the positivism way of fact finding so as to make sure that the evidence presented through empirical research and experimentation is actually true so as to enable people defend the so called facts and ideas. The ides also differed since Popper advocated for observation and deduction but Kuhn delved in the description of the research itself and how it is done (Kuhn & Haqcking 2012).

References

Barad, K. (2000). Reconceiving scientific literacy as agential literacy. Doing science+ culture, 221-258.

Braidotti, R. (2011). Nomadic theory: the portable Rosi Braidotti. New York, Columbia University Press.

Comte, A. (1975). Auguste Comte and positivism: The essential writings. Transaction Publishers.

Fuller, S. (2003). Kuhn vs. Popper the struggle for the soul of science. Cambridge, Icon. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=215958.

Haraway, D. (2003). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Turning points in qualitative research: Tying knots in a handkerchief, 21-46.

Hempel, C. G. (1979). Scientific rationality: Analytic vs. pragmatic perspectives. TG Geraets (ed.), 45-66.

Hollinger, D. A. (1973). TS Kuhn's theory of science and its implications for history. The American Historical Review, 370-393.

Kuhn, T. S., & Haqcking, I. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL [etc.], The University of Chicago Press.

Laudan, L. (1996). Beyond positivism and relativism: Theory, method, and evidence.

Mosley, A. G. (1975). Perspectives on the Kuhn-Popper debate: new directions in epistemology.

Wright, T. R. (1986). The religion of humanity: The impact of Comtean positivism on Victorian Britain.

sheldon

Request Removal

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal: