Download Free Science And Ideology Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Science And Ideology and write the review.

Does science work best in a democracy? Were 'Soviet' or 'Nazi' science fundamentally different from science in the USA? These questions have been passionately debated in the recent past. Particular developments in science took place under particular political regimes, but they may or may not have been directly determined by them. Science and Ideology brings together a number of comparative case studies to examine the relationship between science and the dominant ideology of a state. Cybernetics in the USA is compared to France and the Soviet Union. Postwar Allied science policy in occupied Germany is juxtaposed to that in Japan. The essays are narrowly focussed, yet cover a wide range of countries and ideologies. The collection provides a unique comparative history of scientific policies and practices in the 20th century.
Over the course of human history, the sciences, and biology in particular, have often been manipulated to cause immense human suffering. For example, biology has been used to justify eugenic programs, forced sterilization, human experimentation, and death camps—all in an attempt to support notions of racial superiority. By investigating the past, the contributors to Biology and Ideology from Descartes to Dawkins hope to better prepare us to discern ideological abuse of science when it occurs in the future. Denis R. Alexander and Ronald L. Numbers bring together fourteen experts to examine the varied ways science has been used and abused for nonscientific purposes from the fifteenth century to the present day. Featuring an essay on eugenics from Edward J. Larson and an examination of the progress of evolution by Michael J. Ruse, Biology and Ideology examines uses both benign and sinister, ultimately reminding us that ideological extrapolation continues today. An accessible survey, this collection will enlighten historians of science, their students, practicing scientists, and anyone interested in the relationship between science and culture.
The purpose of this book is to examine how ideology operates--in the sense of influencing the conduct of inquiry--in the policy sciences, defined as economics, political science, and sociology. The author seeks to identify the main ideologies and show how each ideology produces a preference for certain problems, methods, and hypotheses; how it sensitizes scientists to certain phenomena and suggests certain interpretations of those phenomena; and how it closes off other phenomena and concepts from investigation and testing, or at least distorts that investigation. In this book, Diesing critically examines all the major schools of policy-related social thought from 1930 to 1975. He deals with Neoclassical Economics and its various applications, the Keynesians, the Systems Approach, the Schumpeter perspective, the Critical Intellectuals, the Pluralists, the J. K. Galbraith School, New Left Marxism, and the Ecological Paradigm of Schumacher and others. The world looks different if your perspective is that of a rational small businessman working in a society of hypothetical perfect competition, as opposed to that of a proletarian, looking up at your oppressors. Part One is descriptive and evaluative, considering each ideology in turn; Part Two considers the policy implications. "In 1982, Diesing published a remarkable book entitled Science and Ideology in the Policy Sciences. When I interviewed Diesing in Buffalo in the summer of 1984, he told me that to date, the publication had been reviewed in only two professional journals. I was astounded. Science & Ideology...was the best book I had read in a decade, and it related directly to all the policy sciences. The lack of professional response may partially reflect Diesing's disinterest in self-promotion, but beyond this is the 'community' problem. Scholars are recognized within disciplines, but there is only a tiny 'community of social science'. I consider this to be the most brilliant of Diesing's books. Like all of Diesing's works, it remains highly relevant today."--from the introduction by Richard Hartwig.
Science has established itself as not merely the dominant but the only legitimate form of human knowledge. By tying its truth claims to methodology, science has claimed independence from the influence of social and historical conditions. Here, Aronowitz asserts that the norms of science are by no means self-evident and that science is best seen as a socially constructed discourse that legitimates its power by presenting itself as truth.
In Science and Ethics, Bernard Rollin examines the ideology that denies the relevance of ethics to science. Providing an introduction to basic ethical concepts, he discusses a variety of ethical issues that are relevant to science and how they are ignored, to the detriment of both science and society. These include research on human subjects, animal research, genetic engineering, biotechnology, cloning, xenotransplantation, and stem cell research. Rollin also explores the ideological agnosticism that scientists have displayed regarding subjective experience in humans and animals, and its pernicious effect on pain management. Finally, he articulates the implications of the ideological denial of ethics for the practice of science itself in terms of fraud, plagiarism, and data falsification. In engaging prose and with philosophical sophistication, Rollin cogently argues in favor of making education in ethics part and parcel of scientific training.
Professor David Kettler commented at the time of initial release, that this book is "writing with great poise and clarity, the author says important things in a deceptively simple way about a problem of paramount significance. A fine piece of clarification, blending just the right mixture of respect and impiety toward the important heroes of contemporary political science, this is the kind of book I look forward to having available for our courses in political theory."Ideology, though long pronounced moribund, continues to play a central role in contemporary political inquiry. In this reevaluation of the true function of political science, the author lays down guidelines for the construction of fruitful political interpretations in the large areas where ideological assumptions and claims cannot be adequately tested. He analyzes two representative theories of power in American society-those of the "pluralists" who affirm and the "elitists" who dispute the case for democracy-and demonstrates how personal preferences and group-oriented interests enter into the development of these concepts. Speaking to all social scientists and students engaged in the study of political processes, Connolly details the methods by which the investigator-who inevitably brings his own beliefs and values to the task-can lay bare and control the ideological aspects of his own work and that of others.A critical examination of the writings of some of the leading figures in recent and contemporary political inquiry, such as Karl Mannheim, C. Wright Mills, Robert Dahl, Daniel Bell, and Seymour Martin Lipset leads him to assign a decisive role for the political scientist in the creation of carefully formulated ideologies. An original mind, drawing upon an exceptionally rich store of knowledge, has here produced an important book which will be of immediate-and challenging-relevance to the work and studies of all scholars, graduate students, and majors in the field
This text takes a set of central topics from ancient Greek medicine and biology - relating especially to beliefs about animals, women and drugs - and studies first the interaction between scientific theorising and folklore, and second the ideological character of ancient scientific inquiry. Within this framework the author looks at the development of zoological taxonomy, the repercussions of prevailing Greek assumptions concerning the inferiority of the female sex on medical practice, pharmacology and anatomy. Anthropology is used to provide a comparative dimension to the discussion of ancent Greek popular beliefs.
Psy-sciences (psychology, psychiatry, psychoanalysis, pedagogy, criminology, special education, etc.) have been connected to politics in different ways since the early twentieth century. Here in twenty-two essays scholars address a variety of these intersections from a historical perspective. The chapters include such diverse topics as the cultural history of psychoanalysis, the complicated relationship between psychoanalysis and the occult, and the struggles for dominance between the various schools of psychology. They show the ambivalent positions of the "psy" sciences in the dictatorships and authoritarian regimes of Nazi Germany, East European communism, Latin-American military dictatorships, and South African apartheid, revealing the crucial role of psychology in legitimating and "normalizing" these regimes. The authors also discuss the ideological and political aspects of mental health and illness in Hungary, Germany, post-WW1 Transylvania, and Russia. Other chapters describe the attempt by critical psychology to understand the production of academic, therapeutic, and everyday psychological knowledge in the context of the power relations of modern capitalist societies.
A new translation of the final work of French philosopher Jean Cavaillès. In this short, dense essay, Jean Cavaillès evaluates philosophical efforts to determine the origin—logical or ontological—of scientific thought, arguing that, rather than seeking to found science in original intentional acts, a priori meanings, or foundational logical relations, any adequate theory must involve a history of the concept. Cavaillès insists on a historical epistemology that is conceptual rather than phenomenological, and a logic that is dialectical rather than transcendental. His famous call (cited by Foucault) to abandon "a philosophy of consciousness" for "a philosophy of the concept" was crucial in displacing the focus of philosophical enquiry from aprioristic foundations toward structural historical shifts in the conceptual fabric. This new translation of Cavaillès's final work, written in 1942 during his imprisonment for Resistance activities, presents an opportunity to reencounter an original and lucid thinker. Cavaillès's subtle adjudication between positivistic claims that science has no need of philosophy, and philosophers' obstinate disregard for actual scientific events, speaks to a dilemma that remains pertinent for us today. His affirmation of the authority of scientific thinking combined with his commitment to conceptual creation yields a radical defense of the freedom of thought and the possibility of the new.