Suchergebnisse

This article argues that interdisciplinary collaboration can offer significant intellectual gains to political science in terms of methodological insights, questioning received assumptions and providing new perspectives on subject fields. Collaboration with natural scientists has been less common than collaboration with social scientists, but can be intellectually more rewarding. Interdisciplinary work with biological scientists can be especially valuable given the history of links between the two subjects and the similarity of some of the methodological challenges faced. The authors have been involved in two projects with biological scientists and this has led them critically to explore issues relating to the philosophy of science, in particular the similarities and differences between social and natural science, focusing on three issues: the problem of agency, the experimental research design and the individualistic fallacy. It is argued that interdisciplinary research can be fostered through shared understandings of what constitutes 'justified beliefs'. Political science can help natural scientists to understand a more sophisticated understanding of the policy process. Such research brings a number of practical challenges and the authors explain how they have sought to overcome them.

This is an original manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education on 29 Nov 2017, available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2018.1394420 ; There are well documented concerns with the imposition of high stakes testing into the fabric of school education, and there is now an increasing focus on how such tests impact children's 'well-being'. This can be witnessed in reports in the popular news media, where discussion of these impacts frequently refer to 'stress' and 'anxiety'. Yet, there is no work that is able to tell us about what is happening in the bodies of the teachers and children who are living this schooling in the day-to-day; whether this is best considered through the languages of 'stress'; or what the implications – emotional, educational, embodied – of these experiences might be. This paper develops a transdisciplinary approach that brings social and biological accounts together in order to address the 'more-than-social' of the emotionality of childhood and schooling. We seek out opportunities for transdisciplinary connectivity and for new ways of seeing and knowing about learning. We consider what these ways of seeing and knowing might offer to education.

The development of contemporary scientific knowledge is marked above all by 2 interpenetrating tendencies: differentiation & integration. The emergence of many new branches of science, cybernetics, information theory, bionics, sociometrics, mathematical linguistics, econometry, etc is linked to the opposite tendency of integration. New theories emerge as a rule on the borders of existing science (biochemistry, mathematical logic, etc). The most promising development of scientific knowledge at present appears to be at the cutting edges of different branches; interdisciplinary research is a basic need of our time. The relationship between man & society is analyzed. Although man always bears the stamp of his origins, he is a result & product not of biological evolution but of social development. Man becomes genuinely human when he creates tools, instruments & means of production. Together with human thought emerged articulate speech. The origins of man were closely connected with the use of language. The essence of man is the totality of SR. Human consciousness as well as language can be understood only in connection with societal environment. Thinking is a social function & it is organically linked with articulate speech. Society, consciousness, language (speech), developed simultaneously & are mutually interdependent. A science of man can be created only through a multifaceted approach. Modified AA.

This first full length treatment of interventionist theories of causation in the social sciences, the biological sciences and other higher-level sciences the presents original counter arguments to recent trends in the debate and serves as useful introduction to the subject.

AbstractAristotelian naturalism (AN) holds that the norms governing the human will are special instances of a broader type of normativity that is also found in other living things: natural goodness and natural defect. Both critics and defenders of AN have tended to focus on the thorny issues that are specific to human beings. But some philosophers claim that AN faces other difficulties, arguing that its broader conception of natural normativity is incompatible with current biological science. This paper has three aims. First, we consider a distinctive and nuanced critique of AN's general understanding of natural normativity put forward by Tim Lewens. Second, after giving a defense of AN, we explore and evaluate Lewens' proposed alternative view—Kantian projectivism about life forms. We present a problem for Kantian projectivism and suggest reasons for thinking that AN is, after all, the superior position. Finally, we clarify and explain how AN's claims about life forms and our knowledge of them, relate to empirical observation and to contemporary biological science.

The purpose of the research was to determine the learning style of biological science students considering the possible effects of the variables, sex, political ideology and school of origin, on a sample of 59 students consisting of 40 entering and 19 next to graduate of the career of Biological Sciences of the Ricardo Palma University. The study had a quantitative, substantive, non-experimental design, and descriptive cross-section. The data was collected from the Kolb version E learning style instrument, the result indicates that the learning style present in the students who start the career is the usher with 55%, while the predominant style of the students who conclude is the assimilator with 57.89% Concrete learning styles are predominant in the students of the first cycle to be present in 65% of these, however the abstract learning styles are majority in the students of the tenth cycle reach 89.47%. The style of accommodating learning is higher in males (72.2%) than in females (40.9%) of the first cycle, however in the students of the tenth cycle, the assimilative style is higher in women (66.7%) than in men (50%). ; La investigación tuvo como propósito determinar el estilo de aprendizaje de los estudiantes de ciencias biológicas considerando los efectos posibles de las variables, sexo, ideología política y escuela de procedencia, sobre una muestra de 59 estudiantes conformada por 40 ingresantes y 19 próximos a egresar de la carrera de Ciencias Biológicas de la Universidad Ricardo Palma. El estudio tuvo un enfoque cuantitativo, sustantivo, diseño no experimental, y corte transversal descriptivo. Los datos se recolectaron a partir del instrumento estilo de aprendizaje de Kolb versión E, el resultado señala que el estilo de aprendizaje presente en los estudiantes que inician la carrera es el acomodador con 55%, mientras el estilo predominante de los estudiantes que concluyen es el asimilador con 57.89% Los estilos de aprendizaje concreto son mayoritario en los estudiantes del primer ciclo al estar presentes en el 65% de estos, sin embargo los estilos de aprendizaje abstractos son mayoritarios en los estudiantes del décimo ciclo llegan al 89,47%. El estilo de aprendizaje acomodador es mayor en varones (72,2%) que en mujeres (40,9%) del primer ciclo, sin embargo en los estudiantes del décimo ciclo, el estilo asimilador es mayor en mujeres (66,7%) que en varones (50%).