Suchergebnisse

Abstract
Aristotle is often considered to have a very pessimistic view about what histories can tell us, considering them too particular and lacking the generality required for scientific knowledge. Most importantly, they are considered to lack causal explanations. I argue against this view and instead that Aristotle considers histories to provide a highly practical level of knowledge. Histories can provide instances of both accidental and hypothetically necessary causation. I draw on the Athenian Constitution and the Constitution of the Spartans to show that the historiai which were written under Aristotle's direction display these causal explanations. While these explanations are still not at the level of generality characteristic of the most rigorous forms of epistemē, the causal pictures presented are still rich enough to provide valuable insights for both the politician and the political scientist.

The history of humanity is a history of rationality. As a result, mankind has progressed from the Stone Age to the era of modern medicine,
genetics, computer science, robotics, and nanotechnology. The life span
of a man in ancient times was about twenty years, and today, in highly developed societies, a man lives, on average, to eighty-six years. Advances in science and technology have not always had a positive impact. Suffice to say, the ongoing environmental problems that seriously affect humanity or, for example, the dietary problems that have resulted due to genetic manipulation. Scientific and technological development must be considered in a serious and philosophical manner. Ethics are increasingly becoming an integral part of life. In this paper, we focused on the new coronavirus that has led to the planetary-wide disease called COVID-19. All countries have engaged in their efforts to suppress the resulting pandemic. However, some of the utilized measures have been suspect: whether to lock-down people in quarantine, whether their movement should be restricted, whether they should be forced to vaccinate, and so on. Claiming to act prophylactically, scientists, by adding some DNA, RNA segments (gain of function, GOF) to an innocuous human virus, have created a dangerous artificial influenza virus. Likewise, an artificial, infectious coronavirus was created in a laboratory. Both procedures for creating these dangerous, hybrid viruses have been described in eminent scientific journals. The scientists involved in this research told us that they wanted to find cures and vaccines for these non-natural viruses on the off-chance they ever appeared among humans; when carefully handled, engineered organisms provide a unique opportunity to study biological systems in a controlled fashion. Biotechnology is a powerful tool to advance medical research and should not be abandoned because of irrational fears. But the chance of this type of virus appearing among humans is almost non-existent. However, what if these viruses "escape" from the lab, as has happened in the recent past? What if a terrorist organization start producing these viruses on their own according to detailed instructions and then use them? Finally, since the
two great world powers, the US and China, that jointly created the artificial coronavirus, called SHC014-MA15, who can stop them from continuing this practice? Isn't it possible that they also created the current SARS-CoV-2 provoking a death of two and a half million people? Related to these questions, this study deals with the issue of tolerance. A large number of world-renowned scientists really believe that the current cause of the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2, is an artificial, laboratory-created virus, presenting a number of facts for this. It is not disputed that their claims are arguable. This, however, does not mean that their opponents, pharmaceutical companies and some superpowers, who have far greater political and economic power, have to incorrectly and utterly embarrass them all over, morally discredit them,
nor ban their texts on the subject. In science, the struggle must be waged by arguments, not by totalitarian Orwellian methods.