POLI100 UBCO Lecture Notes - Week 2 PDF

POLI100 - UBCO Lecture, September 13, 2024 Guest lecturer Thomas Hielke A. Knowledge and Science Essay: Jackson -- “Playing with Fire” What is Jackson trying to do? What is missing? a. not considering the nature of the object of his science (p.11) b. confusion between politics as something we...

POLI100 - UBCO Lecture, September 13, 2024 Guest lecturer Thomas Hielke A. Knowledge and Science Essay: Jackson -- “Playing with Fire” What is Jackson trying to do? What is missing? a. not considering the nature of the object of his science (p.11) b. confusion between politics as something we do and as something we study (p.4) c. Reiterate the diNerence between politics and political science The problem is that the author is not precise, doesn’t define what techniques are necessary, does not define what a human is What is a human being? a physical entity a spiritual entity a mental entity a consciousness entity have developed words, symbols, and narratives as forms of communication Why should we be asking questions about epistemology? Isn’t this just navel gazing? Can we study politics without defining “political science”? methods of acquiring knowledge that don’t take into account human nature will not be fulfilling we can’t study humans the same way we study matter or non conscious beings or animals (as they don’t show the same characteristics of human beings listed in question 4.) humans demonstrate diNerent sets of behaviours that animals do not communication alone is not enough to show the same amount of consciousness political-social organisation is more complex in humans than in animals B. Human predictability and unpredictability Alasdair MacIntyre: “The Character of Generalizations in Social Science and their Lack of Predictive Power“ in After Virtue (Chpt 8: pp. 88-108) 1. "What managerial expertise requires for its vindication is a justified conception of social science as providing a stock of law-like generalizations with strong predictive power." The science of human beings can not be like the science of the physical world because physicality is only one of many aspects of the human being and experience  Interested in the claims of knowledge that managers make in order to defend their capability of taking charge (power-control) Social sciences is the absence of the lawlike generalisations, ‘if only we can get the study of human beings right we could make the world a better place’ ‘can’t control- predict humans (human activity) like other subjects of science’ All scientific approaches we’ve developed to this day do not fulfil Jackson’s definition of what is science Problem - these sciences have none 2.Social science vs. Machiavelli Machiavelli defines concept of fortune Concept of fortune or fortuna (from the enlightenment) (happenstance) Generalisations, the more specific we can get the more we can estimate human condition but generalisations are a part of human existence 3.Four sources of systematic unpredictability in human life: 1. Nature of radical conceptual innovation 2. Unpredictability of the agent's own actions 3. Game-theoretic character of social life a. indefinite reflexivity of game-theoretic situation b. imperfect knowledge (often intended) c. multiple games in one situation "Knight to QB3 - lob over the net" d. indeterminate set of players and area 4. Pure contingency (stuc just happens) 4.Four predictable elements of human life 1. (necessity of) coordination of social activities 2. statistical regularities 3. (knowledge of) causal regularities of mature 4. (knowledge of) causal regularities of social life Are there systematic forces of human predictability, but you still can't fully predict human behaviour Radical conceptual realisation Unpredictability of the agents own actions (and its consequences-eNects on others) Thus, predictability and unpredictability interlock Fortuna and human predictability (pp. 104-105) pp. 106-107 - rebuttal of managerial expertise - there is no stock of law-like generalizations concerning human life Are we able to change these regularities? (yes)  We need to be a possession of ourselves (unpredictability) and not the creation of others projects and-or desires (predictable) Based on research but don't approach law likeness, generalisations Coexist with counter examples (anomalies-exception in the predictable) Can’t define a specific scope (too general) C. Participation and Freedom 1. Voegelin on Cosmos and Participation (Order and History, vol 1) What is important is the human being searching for humanity (small child developing consciousness) We are not outside that of which we are exploring (we are not gods) What can I know? Is limited by our humanity (we are not gods) Can not make claims about absolute knowledge Our existence is not an object of study for sciences but an act of participation i) what is permanent/constant in human history? -- not possessing, but realizing our humanity -- contra Nietzsche/nihilism ii) how to describe participation? c) knowledge and ignorance d) what is the point of this discussion? -- not merely objects, but subjects of our own inquiry - The way of making humans meaningful (in a science) was to include the human account of what they were trying to do and what the result of their actions were It is an essential part the humans have a capacity to take initiative and to create (freedom) Quality of unpredictability (a decision can change up until the decision is made)