Download Free Why Experts Disagree About Social Problems Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Why Experts Disagree About Social Problems and write the review.

Thomas Sowell’s “extraordinary” explication of the competing visions of human nature lie at the heart of our political conflicts (New York Times) Controversies in politics arise from many sources, but the conflicts that endure for generations or centuries show a remarkably consistent pattern. In this classic work, Thomas Sowell analyzes this pattern. He describes the two competing visions that shape our debates about the nature of reason, justice, equality, and power: the "constrained" vision, which sees human nature as unchanging and selfish, and the "unconstrained" vision, in which human nature is malleable and perfectible. A Conflict of Visions offers a convincing case that ethical and policy disputes circle around the disparity between both outlooks.
Technocrats claim to know how to solve the social and economic problems of complex modern societies. But as Jeffrey Friedman argues in Power without Knowledge, there is a fundamental flaw with technocracy: it requires an ability to predict how the people whom technocrats attempt to control will act in response to technocratic policies. However, the mass public's ideas-the ideas that drive their actions-are far too varied and diverse to be reliably predicted. But that is not the only problem. Friedman reminds us that a large part of contemporary mass politics, even populist mass politics, is essentially technocratic too. Members of the general public often assume that they are competent to decide which policies or politicians will be able to solve social and economic problems. Yet these ordinary "citizen-technocrats" typically regard the solutions to social problems as self-evident, such that politics becomes a matter of vetting public officials for their good intentions and strong wills, not their technocratic expertise. Finally, Friedman argues that technocratic experts themselves drastically oversimplify technocratic realities. Economists, for example, theorize that people respond rationally to the incentives they face. This theory is simplistic, but it gives the appearance of being able to predict people's behavior in response to technocratic policy initiatives. If stripped of such gross oversimplications, though, technocrats themselves would be forced to admit that a rational technocracy is nothing more than an impossible dream. Ranging widely over the philosophy of social science, rational choice theory, and empirical political science, Power without Knowledge is a pathbreaking work that upends traditional assumptions about technocracy and politics, forcing us to rethink our assumptions about the legitimacy of modern governance.
In this book, Frank McVeigh and Loreen Wolfer take an historical approach to examine the causes and conflicts behind ten major social problems that have existed for nearly 230 years. Using a critical thinking perspective of the history, sociology, politics, and economics of the period, the authors analyze social problems as a series of conflicts between those with power and those who were at one time virtually powerless. Embedded in this analysis is a discussion of how the shift from a Gemeinschaft to Gesellschaft society has influenced how we address these problems. Using these themes, McVeigh and Wolfer provide thought-provoking insight into the ways individuals, groups, and social institutions change over time, gaining or losing power. The book contains a preface by Arthur Shostak, Drexel University.
Science is continually confronted by new and difficult social and ethical problems. Some of these problems have arisen from the transformation of the academic science of the prewar period into the industrialized science of the present. Traditional theories of science are now widely recognized as obsolete. In Scientific Knowledge and Its Social Problems (originally published in 1971), Jerome R. Ravetz analyzes the work of science as the creation and investigation of problems. He demonstrates the role of choice and value judgment, and the inevitability of error, in scientific research. Ravetz's new introductory essay is a masterful statement of how our understanding of science has evolved over the last two decades.
2017 Lowy Institute Media Lecture
In Social Problems: A Service Learning Approach, authors Corey Dolgon and Chris Baker integrate an innovative case study approach into a comprehensive introduction that helps students understand how they can address social problems in their communities by applying basic theories and concepts.
In this comprehensive tour of the long history and philosophy of expertise, from ancient Greece to the 20th century, Jamie Carlin Watson tackles the question of expertise and why we can be skeptical of what experts say, making a valuable contribution to contemporary philosophical debates on authority, testimony, disagreement and trust. His review sketches out the ancient origins of the concept, discussing its early association with cunning, skill and authority and covering the sort of training that ancient thinkers believed was required for expertise. Watson looks at the evolution of the expert in the middle ages into a type of “genius” or “innate talent” , moving to the role of psychological research in 16th-century Germany, the influence of Darwin, the impact of behaviorism and its interest to computer scientists, and its transformation into the largely cognitive concept psychologists study today.
When did man discover nuclear waste? To answer this question, we first have to ask if nuclear waste really is something that could be called a scientific discovery, such as might deserve a Nobel Prize in physics. In early writings within nuclear energy research radioactive waste appears to be a neglected issue, a story never told. Nuclear waste first seems to appear when a public debate arose about public health risks of nuclear power in the late 1960s and early 70s. In nuclear physics, consensus was established at an early stage about the understanding of the splitting of uranium nuclei. The fission products were identified and their chains of disintegration and radioactivity soon were well established facts among the involved scientists, as was an awareness of the risks, for example the strong radioactivity of strontium and iodine, and the poisonous effects of plutonium. However, the by-products were never, either in part or in total, called or perceived as waste, just as fission by-products. How and where to dispose of the by-products were questions that were never asked by the pioneers of nuclear physics.