Finale

The Age of Em ◽  
2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Hanson
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Free Will ◽  
Human Behavior ◽  
Social Scientist ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Social Analysis ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Common Complaint ◽  
The Social

Over 150 readers have commented on previous drafts of this book. Here are very quick summaries of some of their most common criticisms. Most individual views are of course subtler than these summaries can be. If we include those who declined to read my draft, the most common complaint is probably “who cares?” Many just can’t see why they should want to know much detail about the lives of people who are not they, their children, or grandchildren. While many readers seem interested in the lives of past people who were not personally their ancestors, perhaps these readers make up only a small fraction of the population. Other readers doubt that one can ever estimate the social consequences of technologies decades in advance. It is not so much that these readers have specific complaints about my analyses. Instead, they have a general skepticism that makes them uninterested in considering such analyses. Many see human behavior as intrinsically inscrutable, and many doubt that social science exists as a source of reliable insight. A few are off ended by the very idea of estimating social outcomes, as they see this as denying our free will and ability to choose our futures. A more specific version of this sort of criticism accepts that it is often possible for us to foresee social consequences in worlds like ours, but then says that it is impossible to foresee the social behaviors of creatures substantially smarter than us. So, they reason, we today cannot see past the future point in time when typical descendants become smarter than we are today, and ems are effectively smarter than us in several ways. This view suggests that social scientists today are less able to predict the behavior of smarter people, or of people who are smarter than the typical social scientist. That seems incorrect to me. Still other readers accept my social analysis, but are disappointed that I consider only the next great era, and not the eras that may follow it. These readers mainly care about the long-term future. They reject my argument that understanding the em era is a good first step to understanding the eras that may follow it.

scholarly journals The Use of Drones in the Spatial Social Sciences

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ola Hall ◽  
Ibrahim Wahab
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Social Scientist ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
Fields Of Study ◽  
The Social ◽  
Good And Evil

Drones are increasingly becoming a ubiquitous feature of society. They are being used for a multiplicity of applications for military, leisure, economic, and academic purposes. Their application in the latter, especially as social science research tools has seen a sharp uptake in the last decade. This has been possible due, largely, to significant developments in computerization and miniaturization which have culminated in safer, cheaper, lighter, and thus more accessible drones for social scientists. Despite their increasingly widespread use, there has not been an adequate reflection on their use in the spatial social sciences. There is need a deeper reflection on their application in these fields of study. Should the drone even be considered a tool in the toolbox of the social scientist? In which fields is it most relevant? Should it be taught as a course in the universities much in the same way that geographic information system (GIS) became mainstream in geography? What are the ethical implications of its application in the spatial social science? This paper is a brief reflection on these questions. We contend that drones are a neutral tool which can be good and evil. They have actual and potential wide applications in academia but can be a tool through which breaches in ethics can be occasioned given their unique abilities to capture data from vantage perspectives. Researchers therefore need to be circumspect in how they deploy this powerful tool which is increasingly becoming mainstream in the social sciences.

Value judgments in social science

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom L. Beauchamp
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Scientist ◽  
Social Conditions ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Scientific Theories ◽  
Value Judgments ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Political Values ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Impact

Leading theorists in the social sciences have insisted that value judgments should be strictly separated from scientific judgments, which should be value-free. Yet these same thinkers recognize that social scientists are often committed to values in carrying out their work and may be motivated by moral goals of removing or remedying social conditions. From this perspective, scientific conclusions (one sort of fact) and moral commitments (one sort of value) are intertwined in scientific practices, and the question arises whether a social scientist qua scientist makes value judgments or only makes such judgments in a nonscientific capacity. Related questions concern the role played by moral, social, and political values in the pursuit of scientific knowledge and the impact of these values on scientific theories and methods.

Decline of Ideology: A Dissent and an Interpretation

1966 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph La Palombara
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Scientist ◽  
The United States ◽  
Scientific Culture ◽  
Talcott Parsons ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The Social ◽  
Literary Intellectuals ◽  
The One ◽  
And Behavior

With increasing frequency and self-assurance, the scientific objectivity of American social science is proclaimed by some of its prominent practitioners. Various explanations are offered for the onset of social science's Golden Age, but central to most of them is the claim that modern social science has managed to resolve Mannheim's Paradox, namely, that in the pursuit of the truth the social scientist himself is handicapped by the narrow focus and distortions implicit in ideological thought. Presumably, the social scientist can now probe any aspect of human organization and behavior as dispassionately as physical scientists observe the structure of the atom or chemical reactions. For this reason, it is claimed by some that the ideologically liberated social scientists—at least in the United States—can expect to be co-opted into the Scientific Culture, or that segment of society that is presumably aloof from and disdainful toward the moralistic speculations and the tender-heartedness of the literary intellectuals.The behaviorial “revolution” in political science may have run its course, but it has left in its wake both obscurantist criticisms of empiricism, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, an unquestioning belief in “science.” Quite often the latter belief is not merely anti-historical and anti-philosophical but also uncritical about the extent to which empirical observations can be colored by the very orientation to values that one seeks to control in rigorous empirical research.The claims of modern social scientists are greatly buttressed by the views of Talcott Parsons.

scholarly journals The Use of Drones in the Spatial Social Sciences

Drones ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 112
Author(s):  
Ola Hall ◽  
Ibrahim Wahab
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Social Scientist ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Higher Learning ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
Institutions Of Higher Learning ◽  
The Social

Drones are increasingly becoming a ubiquitous feature of society. They are being used for a multiplicity of applications for military, leisure, economic, and academic purposes. Their application in academia, especially as social science research tools, has seen a sharp uptake in the last decade. This has been possible due, largely, to significant developments in computerization and miniaturization, which have culminated in safer, cheaper, lighter, and thus more accessible drones for social scientists. Despite their increasingly widespread use, there has not been an adequate reflection on their use in the spatial social sciences. There is need for a deeper reflection on their application in these fields of study. Should the drone even be considered a tool in the toolbox of the social scientist? In which fields is it most relevant? Should it be taught as a course in the social sciences much in the same way that spatially-oriented software packages have become mainstream in institutions of higher learning? What are the ethical implications of its application in spatial social science? This paper is a brief reflection on these questions. We contend that drones are a neutral tool which can be good and evil. They have actual and potentially wide applicability in academia but can be a tool through which breaches in ethics can be occasioned given their unique abilities to capture data from vantage perspectives. Researchers therefore need to be circumspect in how they deploy this powerful tool which is increasingly becoming mainstream in the social sciences.

scholarly journals Environmental Sustainability Post-COVID-19: Scrutinizing Popular Hypotheses from a Social Science Perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (16) ◽  
pp. 8679
Author(s):  
Paul Lehmann ◽  
Silke Beck ◽  
Mariana Madruga de Brito ◽  
Erik Gawel ◽  
Matthias Groß ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Ecological Resilience ◽  
Societal Change ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
The Social ◽  
And Coping ◽  
And Behavior

There is an increasingly vocal debate on potential long-term changes in environmental sustainability spurred by the global COVID-19 pandemic. This article scrutinizes the social science basis of selected popular hypotheses regarding the nexus between the COVID-19 pandemic and the societal transitions towards environmental sustainability. It presents results that were derived through an interdisciplinary dialogue among social scientists. First, it is confirmed that the COVID-19 crisis has likely created a potential window of opportunity for societal change. Yet, to ensure that societal change is enduring and actually supporting the transition towards environmental sustainability, a clear and well-targeted political framework guiding private investments and behavior is required. Second, it is emphasized that there are important structural differences between the COVID-19 crisis and environmental crises, like time scales. Consequently, many strategies used to address the COVID-19 crisis are hardly suitable for long-term transitions towards environmental sustainability. Third, it is argued that transitions towards environmental sustainability—building both on reducing environmental degradation and building socio-techno-ecological resilience—may create co-benefits in terms of preventing and coping with potential future pandemics. However, research still needs to explore how big these synergies are (and whether trade-offs are also possible), and what type of governance framework they require to materialize.

ISLAMIC SOCIAL SCIENCES

1988 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mona Abul Fadl
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Belief Systems ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Social Foundations ◽  
Body Of Knowledge ◽  
Human Value ◽  
The Social ◽  
Western Values ◽  
Culture Brokers

The need for a relevant and instrumental body of knowledge that can secure the taskof historical reconstruction in Muslim societies originally inspired the da’wa for the Islamizationof knowledge. The immediate targets for this da’wa were the social sciences for obvious reasons.Their field directly impinges on the organization of human societies and as such carries intothe area of human value and belief systems. The fact that such a body of knowledge alreadyexisted and that the norms for its disciplined pursuit were assumed in the dominant practiceconfronted Muslim scholars with the context for addressing the issues at stake. How relevantwas current social science to Muslim needs and aspirations? Could it, in its present formand emphasis, provide Muslims with the framework for operationalizing their values in theirhistorical present? How instrumental is it in shaping the social foundations vital for the Muslimfuture? Is instrumentality the only criteria for such evaluations? In seeking to answer thesequestions the seeds are sown for a new orientation in the social sciences. This orientationrepresents the legitimate claims and aspirations of a long silent/silenced world culture.In locating the activities of Muslim social scientists today it is important to distinguishbetween two currents. The first is in its formative stages as it sets out to rediscover the worldfrom the perspective of a recovered sense of identity and in terms of its renewed culturalaffinities. Its preoccupations are those of the Muslim revival. The other current is constitutedof the remnants of an earlier generation of modernizers who still retain a faith in the universalityof Western values. Demoralized by the revival, as much as by their own cultural alientation,they seek to deploy their reserves of scholarship and logistics to recover lost ground. Bymodifying their strategy and revalorizing the legacy they hope that, as culture-brokers, theymight be more effective where others have failed. They seek to pre-empt the cultural revivalby appropriating its symbols and reinterpreting the Islamic legacy to make it more tractableto modernity. They blame Orientalism for its inherent fixations and strive to redress its selfimposedlimitations. Their efforts may frequently intersect with those of the Islamizing current,but should clearly not be confused with them. For all the tireless ingenuity, these effortsare more conspicuous for their industry than for their originality. Between the new breadof renovationists and the old guard of ‘modernizers’, the future of an Islamic Social Scienceclearly lies with the efforts of the former.Within the Islamizing current it is possible to distinguish three principal trends. The firstopts for a radical perspective and takes its stand on epistemological grounds. It questionsthe compatibility of the current social sciences on account of their rootedness in the paradigmof the European Enlightenment and its attendant naturalistic and positivist biases. Consistencedemands a concerted e€fort to generate alternative paradigms for a new social science fromIslamic epistemologies. In contrast, the second trend opts for a more pragmatic approachwhich assumes that it is possible to interact within the existing framework of the disciplinesafter adapting them to Islamic values. The problem with modern sciene is ethical, notepistemological, and by recasting it accordingly, it is possible to benefit from its strengthsand curtail its derogatory consequences. The third trend focuses on the Muslim scholar, rather ...

Capitalism Beyond Mutuality?

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Contract ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Business Practice ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Economic Paradigm ◽  
The Social ◽  
Modern Economic ◽  
Great Output

Our quest for prosperity has produced great output but not always great outcomes. The list of concerns is growing and familiar. Fundamentally, when it comes to well-being, fairness, and the scope of our humanity, the modern economic system still leaves much to be desired. In turn, trust in business and the liberal market system (aka “capitalism”) has been declining and regulation has been rising. A variety of forces—civic, economic, and intellectual—have been probing for better alternatives. The contributions in this volume, coauthored by eminent philosophers, social scientists, and a handful of thoughtful business leaders, are submitted in this spirit. The thrust of the work is conveyed in the volume’s titular question: Capitalism Beyond Mutuality? Mutuality, or the exchange of benefits, has been established as the prime principle of interaction in addressing the chronic dilemma of human interdependence. Mutuality is a fundament in the social contract approach and it serves us well. Yet, to address the concerns outlined here, we must help evolve an economic paradigm where mutuality is more systematically complemented by reasoned and elective morality. Otherwise the state will remain the sole (if inadequate) protector and buffer between market and society. Hence, rather than just regulate power we must also educate power. Philosophy has a natural role, especially when education is the preferred vehicle of transformation. Accordingly, the essays in this volume integrate philosophy and social science to outline and explore concrete approaches to these important concerns emanating from business practice and theory.

The Edwards' Report and the International Relations profession

1988 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Nicholson
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Research Council ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Social Science Community ◽  
The Social ◽  
Science Community

The Economic and Social Research Council recently published a Report commissioned from a committee chaired by Professor Edwards, a psychiatrist, so that the Council, and the social science community in general, might know what was good and bad in British social sciences, and where the promising future research opportunities lie over the next decade. Boldly called ‘Horizons and Opportunities in the Social Sciences’, the Report condensed the wisdom of social scientists, both British and foreign, and concludes with a broadly but not uncritically favourable picture of the British scene.

Reflexivity and Sociological Practice

1999 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 184-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim May
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Social World ◽  
Theoretical Knowledge ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Sociological Practice ◽  
Body Of Knowledge ◽  
The Social

Attention to reflexivity is often assumed to be the means through which the assumptions and values of social scientists may be uncovered. Researchers are thus called upon to position themselves explicitly in terms of their place within the research process in order that their interpretations may be assessed according to situated aspects of their social selves. Taking a reconstructive social science as one whose aim is to examine our pre-theoretical knowledge in the spirit of producing more adequate accounts of the social world, this article seeks to make sense of these ideas in relation to their consequences for producing an engaged practice and body of knowledge.

Neurobiological and psychosomatic aspects of infertility in women

2020 ◽  
pp. 21-28
Author(s):  
N. N. Stenyaeva ◽  
D. F. Chritinin
Keyword(s):  
Reproductive Medicine ◽  
Term Treatment ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
The Social ◽  
Long Term Treatment ◽  
Psychosomatic Aspects ◽  
Long Term Impact ◽  
The Relationship

In recent years, ideas about the regulation of the autonomic functions of the human body and the psychosomatic effects of sex hormones have expanded significantly. Dysregulation of the HPG-axis is involved in the pathogenesis of a number of stressassociated mental illnesses. Infertility and its long-term treatment is characterized by a long-term impact on patients of various stressful factors. Reproductive medicine has now made impressive advances in biotechnology. Reproductive medicine has now achieved impressive success due to the revolutionary development of biotechnologies. Nevertheless, a significant number of couples have to struggle unsuccessfully with infertility for many years, and the social consequences of this are extremely significant for the family and society as a whole. Taking into account the relationship between the mental and somatic health of infertile women, greater attention of clinicians to the mental sphere of patients, providing forced childless couples with the necessary psychological and psychiatric care will reduce stress during infertility treatment and increase patient satisfaction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document