In human science, we are often subjected to problems and other issues. However in order to assess these problems, we need to look at the many aspects of human science.
These include business studies, human biology, law, media studies, industrial relations and communication studies.
For all of these human sciences, the aims are the same: to explain human behavior, formulate theories and predict it. However the problem with human sciences includes the fact that it does not focus on the conclusion of the theory, yet the process of finding this conclusion. This means in several different human science aspects, they do not base their conclusion around the results, but the analytical process of finding these results. This can result in more biased information but it offers a very analytical approach to a problem. However when comparing this to natural sciences such as biology, they often investigate to explain something specific. Whilst in human science, they investigate in order to arrive at a course of action that will change or reform an aspect of society.
Saturday, 30 April 2016
Tuesday, 26 April 2016
Knowledge questions
Bad Historian
- To what extent can a background influence the interpretation of an event?
Good country index
- To what extent is quantitative data a reflection of reality?
- What criteria are used to assess the global contribution?
- To what extent is global contribution biased?
"Don't let the Noble price fool you. Economics is not a science"
- What criteria are used to qualify something as science?
- What differentiates between theories and the truth?
- To what extent can economics be considered as a science?
Tuesday, 5 April 2016
Relativism and Subjectivism
Relativism
- A theory that knowledge is relative to the limited nature of the mind and the conditions of knowing- a view that ethical truths depend on the individuals and groups holding them
Subjectivism
- It is the philosophical tenet that "our own mental activity is the only unquestionable fact of our experience". In other words,subjectivism is the doctrine that knowledge is merely subjective and that there is no external or objective truth.
- A theory that knowledge is relative to the limited nature of the mind and the conditions of knowing- a view that ethical truths depend on the individuals and groups holding them
Subjectivism
- It is the philosophical tenet that "our own mental activity is the only unquestionable fact of our experience". In other words,subjectivism is the doctrine that knowledge is merely subjective and that there is no external or objective truth.
Ethical issue (Deontology vs Utilitarianism)
Self driving cars
As todays technology is constantly advancing, the topic of self driving cars has become an important issue in the world of driving. Questions such as "if self driving cars are proven to be safer than passenger cars, should we completely ban manual driven cars?" or who will decide the decisions programed into these self driven cars?
Guess
Looking at it from a deontological point of view, one would argue that murder is completely unethical in any regards, so this means the car would be programmed into having a zero tolerance towards murder, However if a circumstance arises where a child run out in the middle of the street while the car is driving the speed limit, the child does not have the right to be on the road but the car does. So should the car crash and potentiality kill the owner, or hit the child?
Looking at it from a utilitarian point of view, one would argue that if murder was inevitable during a car crash, you would try to minimize the deathly impact. So one death is better than ten people dying.
As todays technology is constantly advancing, the topic of self driving cars has become an important issue in the world of driving. Questions such as "if self driving cars are proven to be safer than passenger cars, should we completely ban manual driven cars?" or who will decide the decisions programed into these self driven cars?
Guess
Looking at it from a deontological point of view, one would argue that murder is completely unethical in any regards, so this means the car would be programmed into having a zero tolerance towards murder, However if a circumstance arises where a child run out in the middle of the street while the car is driving the speed limit, the child does not have the right to be on the road but the car does. So should the car crash and potentiality kill the owner, or hit the child?
Looking at it from a utilitarian point of view, one would argue that if murder was inevitable during a car crash, you would try to minimize the deathly impact. So one death is better than ten people dying.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)