#positivism
Quote
The only way to guard against positivism — granting, of course, that positivism no longer attracts your sympathies — is to cease to fear any absurdities, whether rational or metaphysical, and systematically to reject all the services of reason. Such behaviour has been known in philosophy; and I make bold to recommend it. Credo, quia absurdum comes from the Middle Ages. Modern instances are Nietzsche and Schopenhauer. Both present noble examples of indifference to logic and common-sense...
Lev Shestov, All Things Are Possible
#philosophy#quotes#Lev Shestov#All Things Are Possible#absurd#reason#metaphysics#positivism#common sense#logic
68 notes
·
View notes
Text
Józef Chełmoński - 1912
Kurhan Ukraiński (Ukrainian burial mound)
Warsaw National Gallery
#art#polish art#poland#chełmoński#chelmonski#Józef Chełmoński#młoda polska#secession#dark academia#light academia#realism#romanticism#positivism#pozytywizm#realizm#romantyzm
34 notes
·
View notes
Text
I wonder how did Lalka discourse looked like back when it premiered. What was 19th century equivalent of fandom discussion.
#txt#lalka#bolesław prus#actually if anybody has some historical i for to share please tell me i am so curious#like maybe some older reviews or who knows perhaps even 19th century Lalka fanart#i mean it had to happen aint no fucking way it didn't happen at some point#some polish 19th century artist had to get hiperfixated on it...right???#the doll#polish classic literature#19th century literature#positivism
7 notes
·
View notes
Text
An Exact Scientific Birthday
21 notes
·
View notes
Text
“One of the more insidious implications of the positivistic paradigm is to glorify the role of the 'expert' - researcher, psychiatrist, psychologist of therapist - as they are the only ones deemed capable of diagnosing and treating this thing called madness, a process analogous to the reification of those with religious authority in the past. The mystification of professional training, with its long and poorly paid initiation and strict entry criteria, separates the expert from the patient, attributing seemingly omnipotent powers to the former, so that the professional becomes power incarnate. What Foucault says of doctors we could say of all mental health experts:
As positivism imposes itself upon medicine and psychiatry . . . the psychiatrist's power [becomes] more and more miraculous . .. the authority he has borrowed from order, morality, and the family now seems to derive from himself; it is because he is a doctor that he is believed to possess these powers . . . and it was thought, and by the patient first of all, that it was in the esotericism of his knowledge that the doctor had found the power to unravel insanity; and increasingly the patient would accept this self-surrender to a doctor both divine and satanic. (Foucault, 1967: 275)
Once the experts - whether theorist or therapist - attain power, they are loath to give it up. Thus professional hierarchies, institutions and practices are erected to protect it. The prolonged sacrifices and hurdles of the professional training also ensure little dissension from within the ranks of the professions - how many would expose to the world the inadequacies of their own training, the fact that they are the emperor without clothes? It is much easier to join the charade and maintain the traditional practices and customs. The élitism and mystification is thus maintained. The attribution of these ‘divine and satanic’ powers to the expert, a process which Foucault sees as a ‘reification of a magical nature’ (Foucault, 1967: 276) in the form of objectivity, clearly separates the expert from the lay person - the One from the Other. It thus acts to disqualify the views of interventions of people outside the hallowed confines of the 'caring professions'; and most clearly those of individuals positioned as mad. But as the mad are clearly without reason, is their exclusion from power not natural?”
-Jane Ussher, Women’s Madness: Misogyny or Mental Illness?
15 notes
·
View notes
Note
So, where do you fall on Leftism spectrum? I sure hope not believing in left armament or successful uprising disqualifies me from being futher left than a liberal.
oh this is a complicated question, but in short not wanting a violent revolution doesn't make you not a leftist, it just makes you not an idiot. My view of leftism is that it is about protecting human rights, which is my first priority. I think my leftism boils down to the following points
Liberalism: Negative Freedoms, aka Civil Liberties, protections against government tyranny
Examples: Right to free speech, Freedom of religion, equality before the law, right to a fair trial, habitus Corpus, innocence until proven guilty, warrant any sort of limit on state power
Socialism: Positive freedoms, aka things the government needs to provide to all citizens
Examples: Free education, Free housing, Free Healthcare, free food, land redistribution, free clothing, free lawyers, free support ect
Progressivism, aka Civil Rights, things to protect citizens from other Citizens, mostly in terms of opposing bigotry. So policies that fight back against racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, classism, xenophobia, nativism, religious intolerance, anti Semitism and antiquated cultural norms.
Democratic Republican (not the political party like pro Democracy) Pro Democracy: Democracy is the best government system that we have and the more proportional a democracy the better, we need to remove most authoritarian power structures. democracy should be designed to resist corruption and graft form the ground up
Examples: Ranked Choice voting, abolish the Senate, lower the voting age, popular election of Presidents, term limits, abolish gerrymandering, limit the Supreme Court
Green: Oh dear god, please make the environment less horrible we are going to die
Examples: AHHHHHHHHHHH
I generally think that leftists must balance all 5 of those, if not, its not leftism i want, intersectionality is the name of the game
now within Leftism I am a huge statist, I think the State is the most effective tool for implementing these policies, and the most powerful tool for the left (i also have a low opinion on human nature) I am anti utopian, I am pro intellectual and anti conspiracy theory
So I think that makes me a Progressive Social Democrat, since "humanist" isn't a political party (except in disco Elysium)
#Ask EvilElitest#Leftism#Liberalism#Socialism#Progressivism#Social Democrat#Republican#Democrat#progressivism#Moralist#Humanism#Positivism#Politics
4 notes
·
View notes
Text
Theories of Philosophy of Science
The philosophy of science is a branch of philosophy that examines the nature of scientific inquiry, the methods and assumptions of science, and the relationship between science and other areas of human inquiry.
Here are some key theories in the philosophy of science:
Positivism: This is the view that science is the only reliable source of knowledge, and that all knowledge should be based on empirical observation and experimentation.
Falsificationism: This is the view that scientific theories can never be proven, but can only be falsified by evidence that contradicts them. According to this view, scientific theories should be tested by making predictions that can be tested and potentially falsified.
Constructivism: This is the view that scientific knowledge is socially constructed, and that scientific theories are shaped by cultural and historical factors, as well as by the interests and values of scientists and the broader society.
Kuhnian theory: This is the view that scientific progress occurs through a process of paradigm shifts, in which older scientific theories are replaced by new ones that better explain the data and provide a more comprehensive framework for understanding the natural world.
Bayes' theorem: This is a mathematical theorem that provides a way to update our beliefs in light of new evidence. In the context of the philosophy of science, it is often used to model scientific reasoning and the process of hypothesis testing.
Empiricism: This is the view that all knowledge comes from experience, and that empirical observation and experimentation are the only valid sources of knowledge.
Rationalism: This is the view that some knowledge comes from reason alone, independent of experience. Rationalists argue that there are certain truths that can be known a priori, or without the need for empirical evidence.
Reductionism: This is the view that complex phenomena can be explained by reducing them to their constituent parts or fundamental processes. In the philosophy of science, reductionism often takes the form of attempting to reduce higher-level phenomena (such as psychology or economics) to the laws of physics.
Pragmatism: This is the view that the value of a theory lies in its practical usefulness, rather than in its correspondence to some objective reality. Pragmatists argue that scientific theories should be evaluated based on their ability to solve problems and make predictions, rather than on their correspondence to some objective reality.
Feminist empiricism: This is a view that emphasizes the importance of including the experiences and perspectives of women and other marginalized groups in scientific inquiry. Feminist empiricists argue that scientific knowledge is not value-neutral, but is instead shaped by social and cultural factors that often exclude the perspectives of women and minorities.
Critical theory: This is a perspective that emphasizes the social and political dimensions of scientific inquiry. Critical theorists argue that scientific knowledge is often used to reinforce existing power structures and to perpetuate social inequalities, and that scientific inquiry should be used to promote social justice and equality.
Naturalism: This is the view that everything in the universe is governed by natural laws and processes, and that there are no supernatural or metaphysical entities or forces. Naturalism is often associated with the scientific worldview, which seeks to explain natural phenomena through empirical observation and experimentation.
Historical materialism: This is a perspective that emphasizes the importance of historical and social context in shaping scientific inquiry. Historical materialists argue that scientific theories are shaped by the historical and social conditions in which they are developed, and that scientific progress occurs through a dialectical process in which new theories emerge in response to contradictions and problems in existing theories.
Coherentism: This is a view that emphasizes the importance of the internal consistency and coherence of scientific theories. Coherentists argue that scientific theories should be evaluated based on their coherence with other established theories, rather than on their correspondence to some external reality.
Instrumentalism: This is the view that scientific theories are simply tools or instruments for predicting and controlling phenomena, rather than representations of an objective reality. Instrumentalists argue that scientific theories should be evaluated based on their practical usefulness, rather than on their correspondence to some external reality.
Realism: This is the view that scientific theories provide accurate descriptions or representations of an objective reality. Realists argue that scientific knowledge is grounded in the observation of empirical data, and that scientific theories are more or less true depending on how well they correspond to the facts of the world.
Social epistemology: This is a perspective that emphasizes the social and collective dimensions of scientific inquiry. Social epistemologists argue that scientific knowledge is produced and validated through social interactions and processes of collective inquiry, and that the social context of scientific inquiry is therefore an important factor in determining the validity and reliability of scientific theories.
Structuralism: This is a view that emphasizes the importance of the structure and organization of scientific theories. Structuralists argue that scientific theories consist of interrelated concepts and relations, and that the structure of a theory is more important than its individual components.
Phenomenology: This is a philosophical approach that emphasizes the study of subjective experience and consciousness. In the philosophy of science, phenomenologists argue that scientific inquiry must take into account the subjective experiences of scientists and the subjects they study, and that scientific knowledge is always situated within a particular historical and cultural context.
These are just a few examples of theories in the philosophy of science. There are many other perspectives and debates in this field, and philosophers of science continue to explore the nature of scientific inquiry and its role in our understanding of the world.
#philosophy#epistemology#ontology#science#theory#objectivity#worldview#learning#knowledge#education#scientific method#scientific progress#realism#empiricism#scientific inquiry#positivism#perspectives#society#chatgpt#external world#objective reality
6 notes
·
View notes
Text
#lalka#bolesław prus#pozytywizm#1800s#early 1900s#positivism#art#literature#women in art#Izabela Łęcka#polish literature#polska literatura
18 notes
·
View notes
Text
✌ Time is just a social construct
#positivity#good post op#twitter#positivism#mood#life quotes#lifestyle#positive life#positivevibes#aging meme#healthy aging
7 notes
·
View notes
Quote
In order merely to preserve our existence we have to strain mind and body to the utmost: nay more, we have to think of the surrounding world exclusively with a view to gaining a livelihood from it. There is no time to think about truth! This is why positivism was invented, with its theory of natural development. Really, everything we see is mysterious and incomprehensible.
Lev Shestov, All Things Are Possible
#philosophy#quotes#Lev Shestov#All Things Are Possible#pragmatism#practicality#instrumentalism#positivism#mystery#mysticism
113 notes
·
View notes
Text
"What's the colour of Napoleon's white horse?"
Well, don't fucking ask Hegel that question, i can assure you he doesn't know.
#queer humor#lgbtqia#pretend it's funny pls#the one who gets it gets it#georg wilhelm friedrich hegel#napoleon#y'all wanna tell me i'm not correct about this one?#fight me on this#i'll wait#positivism#phylosophy
1 note
·
View note
Text
Religion and Science: Both Are Faith
What is so commonly misunderstood about science and empiricism, essentially the Logical Positivism of the Vienna Circle (asserting that all knowledge must refer to the five senses), which in practice is the way of thinking of most skeptics of religion, is the myth that it suspends judgment, and lacks non-rational belief. The Vienna Circle themselves eventually admitted this was not so, as their verifiability principle was unverifiable using the five senses alone.
In order to accept science, one must accept one's own senses. One cannot give any ultimate, absolute evidence that one's own senses are ever accurate, but instead one must dismiss the idea of living in infinite illusion as absurd as an existential commitment, and believe in one's senses. This is faith.
Furthermore, to extend this to science more broadly, one must accept the senses of at least some other people, which one does not even personally experience. Again, this is an act of faith.
Religion is avowedly faith- i.e. accepting a non-rational belief in the unseen. The question, then, is not whether religion or skepticism is more rooted in objectivity, because both are rooted in existential subjectivity. Rather, the question becomes a matter of the practical benefits, or potential benefits, of belief versus unbelief.
That is precisely why it is extremely difficult to convert the unbeliever, or to convince the believer to abandon belief: Because in either case, the commitment (faith) is the very core of the person's identity.
If Christianity is true, then this points to the idea of being "born again", in that the former identity (that of the skeptic) is abandoned, and an entirely new existential self (believed to be the Holy Ghost) replaces the old self.
#philosophy#religion#theology#existentialism#science#senses#pragmatism#positivism#faith#Christianity
0 notes
Text
youtube
Philosophy of physics. Constructivism versus objectivism (or positivism, not Rand). Not boring, just long.
0 notes
Text
“That madness is the absence of reason or rationality is seen as an explicit assumption of the positivistic argument, for the model which sees madness in terms of 'cause' and 'effect' implies the person is not a rational agent, he or she having been made to behave in a particular way. It is implicit within the positivistic discourse that the mad person has no control. The absence of reason is what distinguishes her madness from badness. As Conrad argues: 'Deviance that is seen as willful tends to be seen as crime; when it is seen as unwillful it tends to be defined as illness' (Conrad, 1982: 107). This has often been the central debate in cases of what are seen as horrendous crimes, such as mass murder, as exemplified in the case of Peter Sutcliffe, the 'Yorkshire Ripper', the British man who murdered and brutalized women between 1976 and 1982. His murdering of prostitutes could be conceptualized as bad, but when he began to murder 'innocent women' it veered towards the mad, as it was then seen as completely irrational. This is well illustrated by the comment from Jim Hobson, a detective involved in the case:
He has made it clear that he hates prostitutes. We, as a police force, will continue to arrest prostitutes. But the Ripper is now killing innocent girls. That indicates your mental state and that you are in urgent need of medical attention. You have made your point. Give yourself up before another innocent woman dies. (Evening Post, 26 October 1989)
Within a misogynistic culture, to murder prostitutes is understandable, to murder 'innocent' women represents a lack of reason - we cannot believe that a sane person would commit such outrages. As Joan Smith, in her analysis of the Ripper case, comments:
Madness is a closed category, over which we have no control and for which we bear no responsibility. The deranged stand apart from us; they cannot be blamed for their insanity. Thus the urge to characterise Sutcliffe as mad has powerful emotional origins; it is as much to do with how we see ourselves and the society in which we live as it has to do with the perception of him and his crimes. It is a distancing mechanism, a way of establishing a comforting gulf between ourselves and a particularly unacceptable criminal. (Smith, 1989: 137)”
-Jane Ussher, Women’s Madness: Misogyny or Mental Illness?
11 notes
·
View notes
Text
i hate conformed people
that say that negativism is realism and say "haha it will only get worse"
not it will not
i'll make my life wonderful and happy, it's so annoying this doomed narrative that people always try to impose on life, and yet i'm still thriving
0 notes
Photo
(vía Ctrl-alt-del self help reminder in green and blue colors Sticker by jennstore)
Ctrl-Alt-Del. Lamina self-help and emotional care, People who want a positive change in their lives should apply these controls. Original design in blue and green colors that give calm and tranquility to achieve peace of mind. Gift idea for a special person in our lives such as friends, relatives, counselors, psychologists, teachers, Give or have a sticker, a sheet, a poster, a mug, a cushion, a notebook, a t-shirt and many more things with this design.
#findyourthing#redbubble#self help#mental health#positive life#life control#positivism#lifestyle#self help comands#school decoration#live with joy#counseling#stickers#postitive stickers#jennstorecoolstuff4all
0 notes
Last Seen Blogs
gaminggrabs184
The Loss Of CONTEST With Just how To Avoid This
x-no-feelings-x-blog
x-nofeelings-x
cebozcom
CeBoZ.com
pattysmind
Patty's Mind
nenya-business
Don't thank God for Fridays, thank unions