text:
User:Nicola.georgiou/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar group 16/ Power

Seminar Group 16 Power Contributions

= Introduction to this Sandbox - Power=

The word Power is a word most human beings are familiar with. It is something that affects every human in her everyday life. When approaching the concept of power from an academic perspective, it is realised that the perception of power is more complicated. For instance, in the discipline of politics, the word ”power” might awake connections such as government, election, democracy and dictatorship. However, in another discipline, Physics for instance, the word ”power" gives connotations to the natural phenomenon of work and mathematical formulas such as:

F = m × a.

So, what is power? And how can it used, or misused, in different disciplines? This Sandbox explores the interdisciplinary issue of Power and how different types of the concept can be identified.

=Power in Sociology of Family=

Introduction
The origin of the issues and questions regarding power in disciplines might be traced to the subject of a certain subdiscipline: sociology of family. Who will make new scientific discoveries, who will write a book that changes the world, and who will save our dying earth? How will they identify their race, gender, class, and disabilities? As “the simplest and smallest unit[s] of society,” families might have some of the answers.

Definition of Sociology of Family
The Penguin Dictionary of Sociology defines sociology of the family as “the study of how human sexual reproduction is institutionalized and of how children, who are the product of sexual unions, are assigned places within a kinship system.” The two main issues in sociology of family are “The relationship between types of family structure and industrialization” and criticisms suggesting that “a woman's place in the home compounds female inequality in society at large and that the modern family based on intimacy and emotional attachment in fact masks a system of exploitation of wives by husbands and children by parents.”

Power and Sociology of Family
Sociologists David M Newman and Elizabeth Grauerholz divide the part on “Thinking Sociologically about Families” of their book Sociology of Families into chapters on the relationships between families and gender, ethnicity, and wealth. Such are some of the identities that have become inseparable parts of the notion of power over the course of history. A project called “Dollar Street” shows our world as a street ordered by income, with 30,000 photographs of 264 families from 50 different countries. The project makes one imagine how large a role families, or even the kinds of toys children play with, in creating the boundaries of the notion of power. In the chapter “Duty to Parents” of A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, Mary Wollstonecraft explores the power of parents over their children and compares the two possible bases of that power: “blind obedience” and “reason.” She quotes John Locke: “if the mind be curbed and humbled too much in children; if their spirits be abased and broken much by too strict an hand over them; they lose all their vigour and industry." To her, this strict hand of their parents weakens girls much more than it weakens boys. Once the girls grow up to become women, they continue being a part of the same vicious cycle that raised them; as Engels says “In the family, he is the bourgeois, the woman represents the proletariat,” drawing an analogy between the power inequality existing within economic classes and within family.

Conclusion
Sociology of family explores the power dynamics within families and marriages that oftentimes reflect the larger society. It explores how race, gender, class, and disabilities that a child is identified with at birth, plays a role on where she will be placed on the power spectrum for a whole lifetime. It also explores how the approaches of her parents to race, gender, class, disabilities, and beliefs will determine her actions on shaping that power spectrum, for a whole lifetime.

= Power in Medicine =

The power of doctors, as both direct and indirect coercion
Doctors are the only ones who are able to heal people, who have the knowledge required to do it. They automatically become powerful in the sense that they are the only ones who can prescribe treatments to people, who can directly decide which patient they take charge of first during emergencies, and so on. This constitutes the first kind of power that they hold, the direct and immediate kind. This fundamental power that is within their reach is most likely due to the long studies that they undertook to get there, the prestigious diplomas that they have, and is the reflection of an institutionalized society that rewards education priviledges and intellectual elites. There is indeed some sort of universal consensus on the fact that doctors hold the absolute truth and have to be trusted no matter what. However, "Healthcare professionals must recognise that they do not hold a privileged position from which they alone recognise all medical truths". In fact, there most certainly is a monopoly of medicine, as we know it, that does not leave any place left for other alternatives (such as herbal medicine, acupuncture, osteopathy…) which comes from the fact that current medicine is based on a universal scientific truth that is accepted by everyone, and never contested. In other words, powerful medical institutions have constructed a framework in which the patient believes that he moves autonomously, when he, in reality, does not have a real incidence on his choices that are shaped by the flow of medical knowledge gravitating around him. However, we can highlight the fact that in a situation like our current one, medicine definitely does not appear as a flawless institution which holds the absolute truth, as we see how different powerful figures of the healthcare system are still arguing on the nature of coronavirus, and struggling to find a common ground with the problematic amount of diverging opinions on the matter.

Medicine as a powerful institution involved in discrimination processes.
There is, beyond doubt, an intersection of power within medicine. More than exercising a constant power on patients, the medical institution illustrates inequalities in rather precise and punctual areas such as gender or ethnicity. First of all, access to healthcare is not the same for every population as precarious groups (especially in the US but also in the UK) of people can struggle to afford it, usually non-white people. The second matter has to do with gender. Privileged white males have more access to prestigious studies like these, they become doctors and sometimes abuse of their medical power: "In January 2016 a powerful white male doctor sexually assaulted a black female patient at one of the most prestigious academic hospitals in the U.S." . Abuses of power are indeed pretty frequent within such a big institution, "Perhaps his power, prestige and sense of invincibility were all factors that actually made him feel like he could get away with exploiting others." This, once again, illustrates the fact that doctors have an indisputable power over patients, that is unconsciously and collectively accepted. Furthermore, gender inequalities are well represented in the gynecological sector, in which women are regularly mentally and physically abused. They are indeed systematically exposed to emotional harassment and pressure concerning pregnancy, abortion, constantly made guilty for their actions on their body, and even sometimes physically hurt by doctors who totally disregard their body and intimacy.

=Power in Sex Work and Female Liberation= Sex work, defined as ‘the exchange of sexual services, performances, or products for material compensation’, is a considerably stigmatised topic, in which power, coercion and hierarchy play significant roles. This is displayed in the forms of coercion of necessity, power of the system, and underlying gender oppression.

Power of Necessity
The public often assume all sex workers enjoy their work and that they choose to do this, but in reality, the majority of female sex workers have been coerced into this line of work due to unfavourable situations such as drug addiction, asylum seeking or destitution. In an interview across 9 countries, 89% of respondents “wanted to escape prostitution, but did not have other options for survival”. Within sex work itself, there is a large power imbalance between the client and the worker — the job is essential to the worker, but not the client, thus the worker is inclined to follow their client’s orders and requests, albeit how unsafe and degrading it can be, putting them in a position of maltreatment, potentially leading to further detriment — a Korean study found that 81% of women who had partaken in prostitution had symptoms of PTSD. In regions where sex work is criminalised, workers are in such precarious positions that they risk the possibility of arrest, exhibiting the true necessity of their job. This is an evident example of indirect coercion, caused by deprivation, fundamentally linked to our insatiable capitalist society.

Power of the System
If a worker feels threatened by their clients while self-employed, as they risk being raped and experiencing other forms of violence, they may seek a manager — a person who can administer clients and their background to ensure safety, or to obtain more customers, increasing revenue for the worker. However, especially where sex work is illegal, this can give rise to exploitation of the worker, particularly by male managers towards female workers. For example, the manager can take a higher percentage than the amount agreed on, and even threaten and abuse if demurred. This is a form of direct coercion — the worker has less power than the manager and must follow their direct orders, or they are endangered. Another display of direct coercion lies within the criminalisation of sex work by the government. Mariana Popa, a sex worker in East London, regularly cooperated with other street workers to ensure safety. However, a police crackdown compelled her to work alone to avoid arrest, resulting in her getting stabbed to death. This direct coercion can also be seen in sex workers and travel restrictions. Some countries still explicitly outlaw the entry of sex workers — in the USA, prior to entry, they must be granted a waiver, a long and costly procedure, and even then entry denial is still a possibility. The same rule is applied to individuals who have a history of drug use, revealing the true deprecation of sex work and the power disparity between client and worker, involved in the same field. As women compose the larger portion of the sex work population (85-90%), the underlying systemic oppression of the female population is presented.

= The different forms of economic and political power =

Introduction
Different forms of power can be observed in many different social issues such as government and politics, environmental issues or economical issues. Today we will look further into some of the major forms of economic and political power.

Power created by money
First, we will look at the power created by money. “Money is an economic unit that functions as a generally recognized medium of exchange for transactional purpose in an economy.” Money is a symbol of economic value and social power. It has in the past, changed its appearance and value however it always has been the main actor in trades. In fact, it is a social organisation made to facilitate economic interactions and exchanges between the population. For the idea of money to work, it has to rely on the idea that every individual in the society using it have to accept and recognize it. Therefore we understand that it comes with constraints, however those constraints are necessary in order to be able to express the power of money. As said previously, this power can be mainly found on the idea that it facilitates trading and exchanges as it puts a value on things. Furthermore, the power created by money can be seen through the fact that it is more efficient than trading. In fact, where trading requires both actors to agree on both things that are traded, monetary transactions facilitate this by having only one aspect to consent on, and that’s just the monetary value of what is traded. Thus, the power created by money is that it facilitates the growth of commerce and transaction.

Power of government
To look at the power of governments, we will focus on western European countries such as the United Kingdom. Montesquieu expressed a doctrine on the separation of powers in a government in order to avoid tyranny. It says that “power should not be concentrated in the hands of one person”. Montesquieu also recognized the three functions of a government in our societies : Legislative, Executive and Judiciary.

Legislative power : “Legislative power is the capacity of a legislative chamber or actors within that chamber to thwart, encourage, or compel actions by others.” Legislatures have the power to create laws, however the extent of this power depends on what type of political system the legislation takes place in. For example, in Westminster style legislatures, the executive power can basically pass any law they want as they usually have a majority behind them. However, this is not always the case.

Executive power : The basic definition of executive power explains that the executive power is the power to execute the laws. Thus, we understand that executive has to keep the confidence of the legislature as they both work hand in hand.

Judiciary power : The judiciary power is the third power controlled by the government. It is the system of courts that “interprets, defend and applies the laws”. This branch also has the power to change laws.

As those three functions of the government becomes clearer, we understand that Montesquieu’s doctrine makes sense. The notion of power makes sense in this situation because in fact, the same part of the government of a state can not control entirely the three functions or they will have full power and it will look more like a dictatorship than anything else.

=Power in Visual Arts and Dadaism=

Introduction
Our norms of aesthetics expressions are usually shaped and displayed in a certain way, which may lead to the power of non-decision making in the field of Visual arts. Those new works of art with the aggressive nature are not part of or even contrary to the preconceptions, thus, the interests to them are not articulated, and remain hidden.

The natures of power in artistic creation and appreciation
Visual arts is one of the major sub-disciplines of Arts, defined as “specific activities that produce sensitivity in humans done by people with skill and imagination”. It includes multiple forms of artistic expression e.g. architecture, ceramics, drawing, painting. Like one unique type of artistic language, the artists use their works to construct certain subjectivities through employing particular techniques and elements. This shows that the underlying power is used as strategy to convey certain meanings and emotional feelings to the public.

Besides, power as indirect coercion exits in the process of artistic appreciation. The quality of artworks is judged by people who access and rate it. The opaque rating criteria reveal an implicit form of power as there is no unified standard widely known to the public for assessing artworks. For instance, people all think that the artworks created by famous artists e.g. Picasso, Monet, Vincent Van Gogh are unarguably accepted to be successful.

Dadaism as an example
Dadaism is an anti-art art movement triggered by the outbreak of World War I, with participants in Europe and North America in the early 20th century. Dadaists protested against “bourgeois nationalist and colonialist interests” which they believe had lead to the war. By fighting against rationality, they strived to create “a different narrative” and “a new normal, a new discourse” for that time. One typical example is Marcel Duchamps’ Fountain urinal that “satirized the traditional veneration of the arts”.

Various forms of power could be identified from this artistic movement. Dadaists confronted to the mainstream understanding on arts, and tried to use power of their artworks as direct coercion to cause actions of the politics. Also, many people tend to accept what is considered normal and do not accept Dadaists’ aggressive works even nowadays. This reflects the strong power of predominant norms rooted in public opinions. Moreover, Dadaism was a mirror to that society and had profound impacts later on art design, the art of protest, and the artistic movements. This vividly shows that because artworks reflect the times, they possess power to strategically drive the evolution of forms of artistic expression in our shifting cultures. This gradually widens the scope of acceptable objects in the discipline of Visual arts.

=Power in Education Studies=

Introduction
Learning is highly valued in most societies, often seeing education as powerful gateways into better vocational opportunities. The purpose of education studies is placing education in social contexts to better understand who, how and what purpose education will serve for the learners and the wider community.

Education Inequality - Power as Strategy
Education inequality happens at the local level: although a country has a high GDP, for example the United Kingdom, a Unicef report that looked at the educational inequalities in the world’s richest countries ranked the UK 16th in secondary school and 23rd in primary school educational inequality. Family background is recognised as influential in academic achievement and access to academic opportunity. As an example of power as strategy, the division between ‘private’ and ‘public’ schools furthers educational inequality, private education establishing a culture of social exclusivity for those of affluent family backgrounds. In short, private school’s prominence provides further advantages for their already privileged students in an enduring cycle of power and entitlement.

Power on a Structural Level - Intersectionality of Power
On the other end of the spectrum, differences in academic skills can also be a systemic issue, with an intersectionality of power based on gender, race and income. In the USA a history of slavery puts minorities, and specifically Black students at a disadvantge. Governments funnel more money into white education than minority education, more money put into vocational education in preparation for manual labour to prevent minorities from reaching higher status jobs, and standardised testing being a sole marker of success that hinders minority students from entering higher education institutions. Females are also more likely to do well in humanities driven subjects, while males the scientific and mathematical, a form of indirect coercion. Ultimately, the realities of minority education have become vehicles for maintaining power on a structural level in society. The placement of students in the educational system parallels the hierarchical structures in society. According to their social standing, students are judged and held to a different standard by their teachers and the government policy makers that fund their schools. This leads to the creation of unequal classroom cultures and an indirect coercion of power, rooted in histories of racial and gender biases that continue to marginalise certain demographics.

=Power in Art History=

Introduction
The discipline of art history is rooted in the artists that created the works in the likes of The National Gallery and The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Artists like Michaelangelo, Da Vinci, and Caravaggio, who were all the greats of Renaissance art. But who were they? They were all men. Another artist who, like the men mentioned above, created Biblical paintings of masterful beauty, was Plautilla Nelli. Except, Nelli was written out of every Renaissance history book, being dismissed as “another nun with a paintbrush,” and her name is virtually unknown.

Sexism in Art History
The origins of this bias are found in the dynamics of art history. Women were mostly barred from artistic training and professions until the 1870s. But why does it still exist today? From the percentage of works by female artists in famous galleries to the amount women’s artworks sell for at auction, the numbers paint a bleak picture. Two works by women have broken into the top 100 at auction sales for paintings, even though women were the subject matter for about half of the top 25 paintings. Georgia O’Keefe holds the auction record for work by a deceased female artist which sold in 2014 for $44.4m, compared to a Picasso work that sold for $179m the following year. At the National Gallery of Scotland, only 4% of works are by female artists.

Hope for the Future?
Unfortunately, these biases are grounded in long-standing traditions in the discipline of art history. Many feminist art histories doubt the possibility they will be able to gain any ground in the study of women artists. They believe that the field of art history is “based on assumptions which make it impossible for women’s roles and images ever to be interpreted correctly.” However, a shift may be occurring in the art world. Guerilla Girls, an artist-activist group set up in the 1980’s to challenge the dismal representation of women in the art world, are being featured in an exhibition at the Whitechapel Gallery. A new Los Angeles gallery was opened recently with an exhibition of female abstract sculpture. And in big auction houses, more shows by female artists are being held, with their works commanding millions of dollars. It is with hope that places of art influence, such as these commercial galleries and auction houses, will be able to change this long-standing power imbalance found in the discipline of art history.

=Power in Historical Bias=

"Mistakes in biased history are motivated, not accidental"

This is how C. Behan McCullagh concludes the introduction to his article Bias in Historical Description, Interpretation, and Explanation. McCullagh was a professor in philosophy at La Trobe University before his retirement in 2007. His research was focused on the philosophy of history and the use of history. In the mentioned article, McCullagh discusses bias in the discipline of history. This area of research provides valuable knowledge in relation to the concept of power.

Introduction to Power
Power is a commonly used concept in politics, sociology as well as physics, but the definition of the word is less obvious. Power could be described as ”the ability to control people or things”, but it could be argued that the concept of power is not that simple for the reason that there are more than one type of power. Two of these are interesting in relation to historical bias: Power as a strategy or language and power as indirect or institutionalised coercion.

Power as a Strategy in Historical Bias
The first aspect of power is that it can be used as a strategy and a language. In the discipline of history, this can be seen in how history has been told. An example is the nordic vikings. In the nordic countries the vikings are widely portrayed as heroic and adventurous soldiers who explored new land and brought wealth back to their homeland. In contrast to this it can be examined how the United Kingdom tells the story about the vikings. In British sources, words like ”ruthless pirates” and ”terror from the sea” replace the heroic terms found in nordic historical sources. This illustrates how the language used in the portrayal of history can become a strategy for creating power dynamics by showing one part as superior and another as inferior. Another example is the version of colonialism that European children learn in school. It is often showed as something progressive for Europe rather than something damaging for the colonised regions which is a way of showing Europe as more powerful and less evil.

Power as Indirect Coercion in Historial Bias
On the contrary, historical bias can also be considered power as indirect or institutionalised coercion. This sort of power is based on unconscious bias, meaning that the intention is not to create a superior and inferior power dynamic; but it still is created because of institutionalised inequality. This could mean that the British colonisation of Africa is showed the previously described way because of tradition, and not for the reason of establishing a power dynamic. Interestingly, this principle is incompatible with the introductory quote by McCullagh; that historical bias is not accidental. Hence, an intriguing further area of research could be how historical research and historical teaching today is influenced by power as strategies or indirect coercion.

Conclusion
To conclude, historical bias can deliberately be used to establish a certain balance of power, which historical sources state regarding the British colonisation, for instance. However the fact that modern day history textbooks still maintain this power relationship makes it interesting to examine whether this still is a power strategy or if it, contradictory to McCullagh’s research, is accidental institutionalised coercion.

= Power in Nursing: The Impact of Gender Roles in Nursing =

Modern nursing appeared in 19th century Germany, with Theodor Fliedner (1800–1864) organizing deaconesses in Germany-where young women from small villages and lower classes moved from around Germany to Kaiserswerth to be trained in nursing care - and Britain, with Florence Nightingale(1820-1910): known as the founder of modern nursing and as a social reformer in the medical field. Although the action of caring for the ill was already in practice since circa 1–500 AD, when religious organizations were the care providers, nursing became a certified profession only in the 19th century.

How Gender Roles impacted early Nursing?
The roles that women were taking as care-takers or housewives shaped how they were perceived in society. In the late Middle Ages, words of the semantic domain of "mother" and of "woman" were associated with caring meanings It was a sensible implication, provided the conceptions the society had in those times, that since women carry tasks such as delivering babies, they must also be able to care for them and for others.

Wet-nursing was a common practice before infant formulas were invented in 1865. Women were breastfeeding abandoned or orphan children and children whose mothers could not breastfeed them, sometimes for money, thus encouraging the reasoning behinds women's image as the care-taker of a family.

Nuns are another example of women whom it was expected from to be able to care for the poor and ill; they were viewed as charitable practitioners and were highly esteemed in the society. Before nursing became officially a profession, in the Civil War, the term 'nurse' could be, as well, misconstrued. Since there were no nursing schools yet, nor official nursing credentials, a 'nurse' could have been the wife of a soldier on the battlefield. The nurses that volunteered on the battlefield were usually professionally inexperienced; their experience came from caring for their loved ones.

The Age of Modern Nursing

Multiple practice schools for nurses opened in the late 19th century, most notably, Florence Nightingale's school of Nursing and Midwifery at St. Thomas' Hospital in London, which opened in 1860. Although, at first, nursing as a discipline was criticized because of its lack of theoretical rigor and its emphasis on practice and caring, a committee for the study of nursing education, supported by the Rockefeller Foundation, encouraged in the Goldmark Report(1923), that nursing schools should be more academical, become a discipline at universities and that students should no longer provide free services for their practices.

The majority of male nurses from the early 20th century worked in mental hospitals(psychiatric hospitals) and received very little training; they were perceived as less qualified and of lower status than female nurses, thus establishing a gender stereotype within modern nursing: men worked in mental nursing, women worked in general nursing. Many schools even rejected male students, for they could have seduced or upset the female students.

In the United Kingdom, after World War II, when the Ministry of Health saw that male and female nurses can work together(nurses had to work together regardless of gender due to a shortage in the number of nurses available for Worl War II), the employment of male nurses in both mental and general nursing increased. The ministry arranged a one-year training course for men leaving military services and offered male nurses full-time jobs by the National Health Service(NHS).

By 1960, men were allowed to become members of the Royal College of Nursing and there was a gradual rise in the number of male nurses.

How Past Gender Roles in Nursing impact our Society today?
Despite more men being associated with nursing jobs today, the gender divide remains uneven with 11.2% of nurses and health care workers employed by the NHS being men, in 2015.

The term [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwife#:~:text=A%20midwife%20is%20a%20health,who%20are%20physicians%20(doctors). midwife] is used to this day, although there are male nurses who have this profession as well as women. The slang job titles being attributed to males in nursing positions such as, murse(a male nurse) or [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/midhusband#:~:text=Noun,of%20midwife%3A%20A%20male%20midwife. midhusband](male midwife), continue to show that to this day, gender roles are imprinted in nursing, from the early basis of the discipline. As of 2016, a study by Health Education England shows that children feel more at ease having a woman as their nurse and that they perceive females as nurses and males as doctors.

In 2019 roughly 16,000 students graduate from UK nursing schools, both men and women, according to the Royal College of Nursing ; despite a shortfall in the number of students that graduate each year and the misconceptions of gender roles from the past that still follow the profession, today people realize the importance of nurses and nursing students in society due to the deadly 2020 pandemic : COVID-19.

=Power in the media and social media platforms=

The media, indirect coercion and power as strategy
The notion of power as ‘indirect coercion’ can be observed in the distribution of information via media outlets in the modern age. Many media providers mobilise biases through their platforms and are fuelled by CEOs who have an ideological agenda to share with the masses. FOX News and Breitbart Journal have been described as the most politically biased networks in the United States, with a -51 bias score, indicating that this is a consensus shared by both Democrats and Republicans. In this way, one can also note how certain strategies are used by said media providers to exert power over people’s ideologies and biases. This can be furthered by observing how social media platforms use personal data and search history to inform which advertisements are presented to the viewer, with the most prominent case of this being the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data scandal that was considered a breach of user privacy and demonstrative of how ‘global manipulation is out of control’.

Intersections of power within social media platforms
Despite this, the advent of social media has restored users with a greater level of autonomy than historically observed. Although there are guidelines that have to be upheld in regards to conduct expected on social media platforms, there is generally a lack of censorship and freedom to post content aligned with the creators’ ideals. This demonstrates the power of the individual, but at the same time, the economical power of social media, which can be noted through it’s use as a career platform for influencers of today, some of whom can earn up to $1 million per post. Moreover, perhaps the power of social media is best observed in the legal realm; it has served as the basis for social movements that have resulted in the conviction of various criminals and raised awareness to wider social issues. The biggest instance of this, the #MeToo movement resulted in famous criminals like Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby, who had largely evaded prosecution until this point, being brought to justice, and simultaneously triggered a domino effect of victims taking power back from their oppressors through social media. This demonstrates the intersections of power that occur within social media being used as a tool through which individual thought can be expressed.

=References=


text:
User:Nicola.georgiou/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar group 7/ History

= History =

This section is intended to introduce history as an independent phenomenon, important for understanding the formation and evolution of various disciplines as academic. The essence of academic disciplines is shaped by history as it is contingent on the constant change of social and intellectual contexts and has unidentified in advance limits how it was developed and by who is significant to the understanding of the silences in history. Moreover, the nature of disciplines is also dependent on the connections they have with other disciplines, which themselves, are determined by history. Thus, this section also explores the potential relationships between the histories of the exemplified disciplines.

A Major Shift in the Discipline of Astronomy
One of the most important turning points in the history of Astronomy is Copernic’s findings in the 16th century, stating that humans are not at the centre of the universe but that we, including the other planets, revolve around the Sun. This theory, published in 1543, was not initially greeted with open arms. Astronomers at that time rejected Copernic’s theory as it substantially clashed with the discipline’s beliefs. Indeed, Copernic’s model entailed that the bodies, including the Earth, must be in motion for the theory to work, however, it was widely accepted during that period that the Earth was stationary. For that reason, heliocentrism was banned, and its teaching was chargeable of heresy. Nonetheless, Copernicus’ ideas initiated a drift in research, and astronomers started to build upon Copernicus’ model. For instance, Kepler contributed by defining the orbits of planets around the sun as well as Isaac Newton by defining their motion with the law of gravity. From there, the current model of the solar system entered a crisis where the surging evidence clearly defied the accepted geocentric model. Even though the astronomical community tried to prove the infeasibility of Copernic’s theory, as new evidence emerged in favour of heliocentrism, they had no choice but to revise the hitherto well-established geocentric theory. Therefore, Copernicus’ discovery had an undeniable impact on the history of Astronomy by provoking a major switch on how to perceive the discipline. Scientists no longer approached the Science of the Universe by placing the Earth at the centre of all phenomena. Rather, Astronomy became henceforward the study of all bodies where Earth does not occupy a central place which is accounted as a massive model revolution.

The Development of Dance as an Academic Discipline
The dance was seen as a primarily physical discipline up until the late 20th century, as although the first introduction of dance as a college major took place in the University of Wisconsin in 1926, at this point it was still considered part of 'physical education' and was taught mainly to women, perpetuating the typical gendered view of it as a discipline. In the 1980s, however, it started to form an additional pathway into academia.

In 1982, at the summer conference of the National Association of Teachers and Lecturers in Further and Higher Education (NATFHE), Betty Redfern presented her paper, 'Philosophical aesthetics and the study of dance as an academic discipline', in response to the increase in dance activity within the education system. The following year dance was examined for the first time in British state schools at GCSE level (then known as Ordinary Level), with emphasis on the academic sides of the discipline such as composition, appreciation and history alongside the aspect of performance- then later in 1986; dance was expanded to examination at Advanced Level. Syllabuses were created to reflect the natural overlap between dance and the social, political and environmental issues which are often explored by choreographers, composers, designers and other roles within dance production.

At this time, the first academic dance courses in higher education were also being created. One of the main proponents of this was Kurt Petermann, who in the First National Ballet Conference in East Germany in 1977, advocated for the importance of the study of dance as a discipline within the academy. 1986 also saw students admitted onto the first academic course in dance studies in Germany at the College of Performing Arts in Leipzig, alongside the creation of similar courses in the UK and USA.

The Development of Obstetrics as a Scientific Discipline
Caring for pregnant women was an activity that was exclusively feminine until the 1900s. A trained midwife would help deliver the baby at home, and it was very unusual for a doctor or surgeon to be present. It was seen as offending female modesty to make men deliver women in the 18th century. In that period, although midwifery was well established, obstetrics was not particularly regarded as a medical discipline in itself. However, it is possible to trace the subject matter and interest in the female reproductive system back to Ancient Egypt and Ancient Greece with Soranus of Ephesus.

The medicalisation of childbirth happened during the end of the 18th century when the discovery of further knowledge in the physiology and anatomy of the uterus led to medical advances in obstetrics. This caused the entry of men in a previously woman-led discipline. . The establishment of lying-in hospitals has also led to obstetrics medicalisation. Accoucheurs (male-midwives) were constantly criticised to the point that some were considered perverts for undertaking midwifery. By the end of the 19th century, doctors delivering babies became widely accepted, and midwives started to become certified. Although, only a very small portion of the physicians delivering babies would call themselves obstetricians, as it was a despised medical discipline. Obstetrics finally became a valued discipline by the 20th century.

Today, maternity rights groups report a surge of interest in unassisted childbirth. More and more women opt for natural childbirth, without any use of antiseptics such as epidural, forceps, or any other medical intervention. This pattern has become more important recently as the amount of public attention concerning obstetric violence has risen. Abuse during childbirth might represent the beginning of a certain decay of the discipline as unwanted caesarean-section and episiotomies occur every day. The abusive relationship between some pregnant women and their physicist results in a lack of trust in medical assistance during labour.

The Development of Law as an Academic Discipline: the emergence of the Law Degree
The history of law as an academic discipline, or legal science, dates back to 1088, the year Irnerius, or Lucerna Juris, founded the University of Bologna, which laid the foundation for the tradition of medieval Roman law. The first scholars in the sphere of the law were called Glossators. However, all of the first medieval legal degrees were that of Doctorate level. Legal science took on a new dimension at the University of Paris, where the «Bachelor of Laws» degree was introduced. It was this system that was later endorsed into the curriculum of Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, where it continued even after its termination in continental Europe in the early 19th century. However, the nature of the teaching of legal studies at that point was mostly only theoretical, scientific, or philosophical, lacking professional training and, therefore, did not serve as proper preparation for legal practice. Since 1292, the Inns of Courts served as the only platform where one could experience training in the practice of common law. After, this function was undertaken by single practitioners. However, with an intent to improve the effectiveness of education, students turned to private apprenticeships with professional lecturers, resulting in the establishment of the institution of Inns of the Court system, which by the 17th century assumed the role of a formal university. Moreover, the importance of professional lawyers rose immensely during the Crusades as they were high in demand. This led to the issue of the act by the parliament in 1729 and the implementation of a formal apprenticeship course for lawyers into the curriculum. Although, it was not until 1846 that the need for formal legal schools had been acknowledged by the parliament, and by the end of the century attaining the L.L.B degree became the universal requirement for practicing law.

The Evolution of Criminology as a Discipline
Dating back to the 18th century, the discipline of criminology has been one that integrates knowledge of anthropology, psychology, sociology, biology, medicine, and law, to give a holistic and comprehensive understanding of the discipline. The idea was for this integration of disciplines to produce a general theory of behaviour which could then be applied to “explanations of both crime and criminal behaviour”. The approach to this discipline began in the late 18th century with 'classical' criminology which leaned heavily into the realm of philosophy whereby "punishment should be proportionate to the crime committed", an idea posited by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. This school of thought was challenged by Cesare Lombroso who argued that a more scientific approach was needed to reflect criminal realities accurately, prompting him to introduce the new approach of positivism. The criticism of this idea was one that opened up the discipline of criminology to establish new, and better ways of understanding crime. The growth of criminology as a discipline saw the formation of what is now recognised as the British Society of Criminology (1961) which branched off from the initial foundation of the ‘Association for the Scientific Treatment of Criminals’ in London, July 1931. Further growth saw a shift in focus within the discipline to reflect a changing social climate; feminist criminology was founded in the latter half of the 20th century, alongside a development of forensic science with new technologies and, later, the study of victimology. Since its conception, criminology had developed differently in different contexts as evidenced by its different categorisations across university degrees which include its placement in the department of law, sociological studies, anthropology or medicine. Current context of technological advancement provides a potential for cyber criminology as a disciplinary branch, thus demonstrating the malleability of criminology as an academic discipline.

The Development of Psychology as a Scientific Discipline
One of the most major paradigm shifts in the history of Psychology was its development into being a quantitative, experimental, and scientific discipline in the 19th century. Previously, psychology was widely viewed as a philosophical subject by the western world heavily influenced by the works of René Descartes. The change in view was due to the work of multiple scientists who attempted to gather quantitative data and apply scientific models to their study of psychology, most notably Johann Friedrich Hebart who was influenced by metaphysics and pioneered the use of mathematical formulas in the discipline. However, the shift of psychology towards scientific methods and mathematical models did not come without debate. Franz Brentano challenged Hebart’s views and preferred to build his psychological research on experience and experimentation instead of mathematics.

The emergence of experimental psychology came alongside the establishment of Psychology as a scientific discipline. Wilhelm Wundt was considered one of the founders of experimental psychology. He opened the first laboratory dedicated to Psychology (Psychologische Institut) in Germany, 1879 and later started an academic journal (Philosophische Studien) for publication of psychological research. He also published "Grundzüge der physiologischen Psychologie" which was translated into several languages, including English and is considered as the first Psychology textbook ever written. These are all markers of the development of Psychology as an academic discipline. Apart from Wundt, other prominent figures contributing to the scientific development of psychology include Ernst Heinrich Weber, who introduced the first law in Psychology (Weber’s law); and Gustav Fechner, who published one of the first works of experimental psychology (“Elemente der Psychophysik”), which some consider as the beginnings of quantitative Psychology.

Development of Sociology as a Discipline
As Humans have always been fascinated by understanding the behaviour of their peers, Sociological reasoning has been used since the dawn of time (Ancient Greek philosophers such as |Aristotle, |Plato and |Socrates used it already) and predates the foundation of the discipline itself. Creation of sociology has been viewed as a reaction against speculative philosophy and folklore in the 18th-19th century. Consequently, sociology separated from moral philosophy to become a specialized discipline. In the 18th century, Age of Enlightenment philosophers like |Voltaire, |Hume, |Kant or |Mary Wollstonecraft developed general principles that could be used to explain social life.

The creation of sociology was also due to the great changes the 19th century saw, particularly the Industrial Revolution, which brought great social upheavals.

The word sociology, from Latin socius, “the companion”, and from the ancient greek suffix -logy “the study of”, is defined by |Auguste Comte as the new new way of looking at society. It is the study of human social relationships and institutions. Comte is credited for being the first one to clearly recognize sociology as a discipline; he defines a method for sociology: he studies it scientifically, as an organism. |Harriet Martineau, known for her early observer of social practices (social class, religion, suicide, government, women’s rights), introduced sociology to English-speaking scholars, translating Comte’s writings. |Max Weber established that it was nearly impossible to standard scientific methods to accurately predict the behaviour of groups as people hoped to do; to him, the influence of culture on human behaviour had to be taken into account. He founded a sociology department in Germany at the Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich in 1919. There is still a debate on the way to predict human behaviour: is it scientifically possible or not?

Interdisciplinarity is inherent to sociology: its broad nature causes it to overlap with other social sciences such as economics, political science, geography, education, law, psychology and others.

The Feminist Paradigm Shift in Sociology
Sociology is "the study of the development, structure, and functioning of human society". Even though ancient philosophers like Plato and Aristotle studied the relationship between individuals and society, it only emerged as an academic discipline in 1985 when the first European department of sociology was created by Emile Durkheim at the University of Bordeaux.

Sociology aims to make a comprehensive and analytical study of human societies but has paradoxically excluded women from its analysis and theories for a considerable period of time. This was the result of the idea that men's experience of society is universal and normative, which has isolated women's place in the family prism. Foundational thinkers like Emile Durkheim or Max Weber saw men as the "core constitutive category of the social/cultural".

However, the feminist movements of the 1970s rooted in the feminist paradigm shift in sociology and social sciences in general. Women's experiences were used to create new research on topics like sexual harassment (McKinnon, 1979) or lesbian communities (Krieger, 1982), resulting in a more complex and comprehensive analysis of society. The concept of gender was given a new approach through feminist articles like “Doing Gender”, published in 1987 by Candace West and Don Zimmerman. The article identified gender as a social construct, therefore challenging the sociological theories arguing that men a woman are naturally determined by their biological differences. The new theories, concepts and research developed by feminists have helped to correct gender biases in the discipline and to bridge the silences around women's experiences. This evolution was reflected across other disciplines like history, anthropology and psychology.

Can the social history of pandemic help the world to solve the contemporary Covid19 crisis?
From the Black Death (1346) to the Spanish Flu (1918), the world has gone through many forms of the pandemic which have changed the course of civilizations. These must be studied through interdisciplinary approaches such as Social history, especially with its late paradigm, shift into an ever more dynamic discipline. During the outbreak of covid, countries have endowed themselves with task forces with experts in different fields. The concept that many brains are better than one has probably never been so much put in practice as in our time. Medicine, biology, statistics, laws, politics, geography, education and history coalesce and interact to confront the problem. Historians with a knowledge of other disciplines (especially social studies, statistics, geography, politics and philosophy) have lately entered into the struggle of confronting Covid. Nina Strochlic and Riley D. Champine explain, drawing from many fields, how social distancing flattened the curve in the 1918 pandemic in American cities with a suggestion for comparison in the modern world. This kind of studies lead to compare and contrast past and present and find solutions as explained by Klaus Schwab’s article on the historical danger of neoliberism. Through an interdisciplinary historical analysis, the latter realizes that the past half-century neoliberism have produced social, economic and environmental risks. It is, according to Scwhab, time for “questioning old assumptions and developing a new paradigm.” My answer to the introductory question is yes but only from an interdisciplinary point of view we can reach a new paradigm. Social history must “contribute both to our depth of understanding and help us to navigate the breath”  of the problem we are trying to solve.

How should higher education respond to a change in knowledge?
The pace of change has increased exponentially since the beginning of recorded history; with humanity spending roughly 3,500 years in the agricultural era, and only 350 in the industrial era. In the Western world, we have developed a knowledge society that values education and innovation above manual labour and expertise. However, despite this emphasis on education, there has been little change in the way disciplines have been taught since the founding of universities centuries ago. Ron J. McBeath writes in The Impact of Paradigm Shifts on Education, universities and the education system must “understand, use and internalise such non-linear scientific principles as probability, relativity and organic systems” as “the alternative is mental stagnation”. A new paradigm is required to break the customs of polarised and linear thinking, or there is a risk of paralysis and of traditional education becoming obsolete. In the modern economy, life long education is required to maintain innovation and keep up with the rapid changes in society. The hierarchy within disciplines has also meant that new, emerging disciplines are underfunded and undervalued, and traditional, established ones take priority. To evolve with society, the education systems need to put more focus into the forward-thinking disciplines, and place greater emphasis on interdisciplinarity, as a way to gain a greater understanding of multifaceted issues and better prepare students for holistic thinking that will be required later in their careers. Using history as a basis, we can come up with projections of what may occur in the future, and parallels can be drawn between the oversupply and lack of demand from dying industries, such as coal mining, and the vast increase in those obtaining undergraduate degrees, with overall participation in higher education increasing from 3.4% in 1950, to 50.2% in 2018.

=References=

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
User:Nicola.georgiou/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar group 7/ Truth

Seminar Group 7 Truth Contributions

Truth
The concept of "truth" represents such notions as propositions, beliefs, assumptions, claims, etc., which agree with proven facts or reality. . There are several theoretical approaches to this concept in the academic discourses: Correspondence theory, Coherence and Pragmatist theories. This section presents how the concept of "truth" is approached in various academic disciplines.

Approaches to Truth in Jurisprudence: Main Legal Theories
In jurisprudence, the approach to the concept of "truth" is based on three main legal theories: legal positivism, legal realism, and legal interpretivism.

Legal positivism
The central idea of legal positivism is that the content of the law is contingent on social factors rather than on its moral implications. .Under the framework of this theory, it has been agreed that the content of the law is viewed as a social construction; however, the use of morality in explanation of the law validity causes great controversy and disagreement within the field of study. Therefore, legal positivists could be divided into two camps: inclusive and exclusive. The former category is those in support of the implementation of moral values when explaining the law, whereas the latter argue against this idea. Nevertheless, among the positivist theorists, the source of law and its merits are viewed as two separate concepts. The law, established by official legal authority and recognized by the society, is referred to as the source. However, it does not imply any moral values and can be considered as «bad law» according to particular standards, but being authorized by officials, it is still the law. Thus it is apolitical, asocial, and completely autonomous. What’s more, legal positivism is based on the following theoretical beliefs: when studying and analyzing legal meanings, it should be considered separately not only from the history or sociology of law but also from criticism or assessment of law in relation to other issues; correct decisions are derived from strictly predetermined norms, established without any special alignment with the social justice. This theory is in support of non-cognitivist approach. .

Legal realism
The second approach to “truth” is the school of Legal Realism. It is the main opponent of legal positivism, as it does not recognize the value-free perspective. This approach maintains that the legal system is subjective, characterized by the inconsistency of judicial decisions and results. Scholars of this theory hold that decisions are made by judges, who are humans and, like all other human beings, have their own backgrounds .Thus, legal realism recognizes the political, social, and moral factors that influence the process of decision making and court judgment Moreover; realists believe that jurisprudence is subject to direct human influence as it is inseparable from the power of legal actors to write the law, so, they use ideas from social sciences to explain the relationships between the legal decisions and human behaviour.

Legal interpretivism
Legal interpretivism focuses on explaining the influence of legal institutions on the modifications of laws. The central argument of this approach is that the impact which practice of legal institutions has on the law is influenced by particular principles tenants which explain why such a role should be attributed to this practice. So, the main aim of this focus on the interpretation of the actual legal practice is to define the normative implications of the practice on human rights and duties, by clarifying the principles under consideration. The main postulations behind this approach are the following:

 * Law and moral values should not be completely alienated from each other, but there is a certain distinction between them.
 * Law should not be viewed as, simply, collection of facts, data, or conventions, but rather as something that legal practitioners seek to build within their domain.
 * Law is not an inherent phenomenon and does not exist separately from legal a legal system.

Truth in Psychology: Contrast of Approaches
Truth plays a valuable role in modern psychology, with its ability to justify the many varying areas of psychological research, particularly considering psychology's status as a more recently developed and ever-changing discipline. This means however that the majority of key psychological studies and breakthroughs have taken place over the past century, and the discipline has had little time to become refined, experiencing a multitude of paradigm shifts and constituting of various conflicting approaches, making the concept of truth within psychology difficult to incorporate into practice.

For example, the age old 'nature vs nurture' debate. The conflict between the Biological approach of viewing human behaviour as hereditary or having a biological aetiology and the Behaviourist approach and Social Learning Theory, which view all human behaviour as a result of humans reacting to their environment. These two very different explanations of the same behaviour make it difficult to determine 'truth' within the discipline, especially in cases like the murder of James Bulger, wherein there was huge public debate over whether the perpetrators must have been 'born evil' to commit such unforgivable acts at a young age or they were re-enacting scenes from the film 'Child's play 3' which had been at Jon Venables' house. So when psychology plays a role in criminal conviction, as it did here determining the length of sentencing and methods of rehabilitation for Venables and Thompson, truth is integral to the process- and when there are such different versions of it, it is hard to provide.

Truth in Sociology: multiples perspectives
In Sociology, truth is and has always been controversial, and as its methods have been diversifying since its creation, none is still universally recognized.

Sociology was defined by Auguste Comte as a natural science and was first emphasized as a scientific study. Using sociology, he wanted to remedy the social ills of the society. Structural functionalism, popularized by Herbert Spencer is an synchronic approach that tended to study small scales societies, that addresses the social structure, and follow the Comte’s idea of Sociology as a natural science (with the known metaphor of the society as a body, and the social norms and institutions as the organs). To deduce the truth, Comte would focus on a social phenomenon and see the common facts. It is a positivist approach, a posteriori knowledge, which is based on empirical evidence. About Positivism, Durkheim said “Our main goal is to extend scientific rationalism to human conduct”. He defines the social fact as an entity, and so ignore all sociologists' subjectivity.

Marxist Sociology is another form of approach, developed by Karl Marx, who rejected Comtean positivism. Marxists sociology is a form of conflict theory (the way inequalities contribute to social differences and perpetuate differences in power) associated with Marxism’s aim of developing a positive science of capitalist society. Conflict theory draws truth mainly through the positive way it looks and is deduced of the competition for limited resources. The Symbolic Interactionist theory is on micro-level and its central point are the interactions between individuals and symbols. To symbolic interactionists, communication and one-to-one interactions are where they perceive truth. According to them, that is how people’s social world takes sense. Charles Horton Cooley theorized the fact that we see ourselves when we interact with others.Constructivism is the extension of symbolic interaction theory. It constructs truth through interactions, interviews, surveys on groups and we develop social constructs based on interactions with others.

Problems with Truth in the Study of Evolution
The study of evolution involves several disciplines, including biological anthropology and evolutionary psychology. The discipline is a natural science and aims to reveal true evolutionary mechanisms, while remaining as objective and scientific as possible to reflect the “truth” behind lineages.

Much of evolutionary studies involve empirical methods and using evidence such as fossil records or techniques such as statistical modelling, which reflects the positivist approach to knowledge and truth of the discipline. It aims to understand the true process of evolution through models and theories within a framework. The production of knowledge involves deduction from existing observations and theories and transforming data to language (e.g. hypotheses, analysis of results). However, the process of transforming data to language itself (such as handling of data) and the process of constructing and testing theories is subject to flaws, such as unconscious biases held by researchers or problems with methods used, which may alter the conclusion reached and thus how researchers and the public view the “truth” of evolutionary studies. An example is the myth of the coy female — for a long time, researchers were blinded to the sexual behaviour of females because of the male dominance in the field and because of the influence of Darwin ’s theories. In this case, the theories of evolutionary biology cannot fully mirror the truth of evolution because scientists were not fully impartial. Hence, truth is also subjective. Furthermore, the truth can change over time as theories are examined and further developed, such as in the case of Bateman’s principle — understanding of sexual selection has changed. Knowledge in this discipline aims to be objective, but it may not be able to reflect the truth of evolution fully.

Truth in Eugenics and How it was Proven False
Eugenics, the literal meaning being ‘good birth’ or ‘well-born’, was a discipline that aimed to improve the human race by looking into how ‘good’ genetic traits could be bread into children (positive eugenics) and ‘bad’ genes could be phased out (negative eugenics). Francis Galton first coined the term in 1883, and is considered one of the founders of the discipline, with much of its popularity in the late 19th and early 20th centuries also being attributed to him. Galton claimed that intelligence and abilities are inherited with an efficiency of 20%, and that it was possible through selective breeding to create a better ‘stock’ of humanity; once the idea became popularized, research programmes were set up, and many Western governments adopted the idea, leading to sterilisation and institutionalisation. For example, between 1930 and 1970, around 60,000 people were sterilised in Sweden, with most of them being women.

The research done into eugenics was accepted as valid, empirical evidence and therefore, the findings considered a ‘mirror of reality’, a form of truth commonly associated with natural sciences. However, since eugenics has fallen out of popularity as a discipline, with its close connotations to Nazism and the mass murder or forced sterilisation of those considered genetically ‘unfit’, including tens of thousands of children in Nazi Germany, the so called AktionT4 program where more than 200,000 disabled people have been killed , more research has been done into the process of finding this ‘truth’. It has been proven that, while there is some validity to some of Galton’s and other researchers ideas, most of the findings proving eugenics to be a genuine science were exaggerated by the subconscious biases of the researches, and many of the traits they considered possible to breed out of humans have subsequently been proven not to be down to genetics at all, such as ‘criminality’, ‘feeblemindedness’ and epilepsy. The fall of the discipline of eugenics is an example of how what was once considered truth, and accepted by most scientists was, in fact, invalid and the evidence that was used to prove it was false. It also shows that not all truth is a reflection of society, as scientists can produce incorrect evidence, and therefore instead of mirroring society, truth is constructed by society. Einstein wrote that “physical concepts are free creations of the human mind” and are not solely determined by the world around us, as many belief; this represents a partly constructivist view on the existence of truth. There have also been many other instances in history where what was once considered truth has been proven incorrect, such as the conflict between Newton ’s stationary and Einstein ’s expanding theory of the universe. The death of eugenics and the constantly updating perception we have of the universe around us shows how truth and evidence can be constructed to fit the narrative scientists are looking to prove, and poses the question: what else that we now consider truth and fact may be proven false in the future?

Truths in Anthropology: Colonial Critique
In anthropology, the truth lies in the study and understanding of how social and cultural experiences shape the social world and where differences and similarities in morals, values and structures exist across different contexts. The complexity surrounding these conversations of knowledge and truth within the discipline is in part attributed to the acknowledgement that truth differs in meaning depending on the context. The other part is, as British anthropologist Henrietta Moore argues, that the truth ethnographic research seeks to reveal is ultimately a subjective one; the truth is filtered through lenses of researcher positionality, frameworks of methodology and what the driving force behind the investigation is.

In the pursuit of anthropological 'truth', there exists first a multiplicity of definitions posited by anthropology which cover the relationship of the discipline with ethnology, etymology, empiricism, historicism. This is further shaped by historical context, the many theories of anthropological thought - i.e. functionalism, evolutionism, structural functionalism, cultural relativism - the situating of the discipline within humanities or the social sciences and ideological or political perspectives (marxism, feminism, capitalism, etc.) of the anthropologist.

An evident facet of truth in anthropology is the role power plays in shaping it; exemplified by the colonial connotation in the term ‘research’, power is implicit in the imbalanced positions of ‘researcher’ and ‘researched’ which has most often been the study of ‘Non-Western’ ‘Natives’ or ‘Indigenous peoples’ by European or ‘Western’ anthropologists. In its early development, colonial anthropology most often established ‘truths’ that categorized societies as ‘primitive’/’savage’ or ‘developed’/ ‘civilized’ - only later evolving into a more modern role of study of the ‘Other’.

Truth in anthropology relies on the ability of the individual – be it the reader or the writer – to think reflexively and critically about the anthropological truth or account that they encounter and shape. It is determined by the consideration of moral and ethical implications and, more generally, the who, the why and the wherein its research. In conclusion, within this discipline it is imperative to consider, alongside these questions, that different forms of truth may well exist.

Finding Truth in History
The problem of historical truth is one of the most discussed arguments since antiquity. In my sandbox I will only treat an aspect of this debate that intrigued me—namely Isaiah Berlin’s discussion of Tolstoy’s view of history. Berlin argues that there are some historians (foxes) who are fascinated by the multiple variety of things and others (hedgehogs) who search for a universal criterion. According to Tolstoy, history “is a collection of fables and useless trifles; it presents only a blank succession of unexplained events…no theories can possibly fit the immense variety of possible human behavior.” For Berlin in order to discover a truth in history we should reconstruct the past not only in terms of our own concepts and categories, but in terms of how past events must have appeared to those who participated in them.”  At first it seems that there is no truth in pluralism though I think that with interdisciplinary study we can move closer. Yet, Berlin saw that there are certain lessons in the study of history which we could now define as possible “truths.” For example the recurrent denial of the value of human life for the realization of economic certain ends and the neglect of the value of liberty susceptible to political abuse. These values can probably be seen as “truths” which pervade history, interact with politics and philosophy and can make a better future.

Truths in Political Studies: a Constructivist Approach
In general, science is understood as a way to explain the world that surrounds us. Truth is then considered as a reflection of how things are, in essence, therefore free of any biases. In political science, things are slightly trickier as political theory acknowledges the unavoidable existence of social, historical and even personal factors. In other words, the study of politics always operates within a given context, and the framework of analysis in which truth claims arise are compelled to be ingrained in the permitted conditions of reality. Truths, sometimes known as ‘usable knowledge’ in politics, and on what policymakers and politicians base their actions, are information that adheres to key principles. It should be first and foremost timely manner, meaning that it should be accurate and useful, meanwhile the process of policymaking. Furthermore, knowledge must minimize biases, notably by essentially involving participants that are not dependent upon the information. In politics, the audience is often suspicious of potential biases or corruption. This is why international institutions sometimes get involved to ensure the legitimacy of political discourse, notably by undertaking interdisciplinary research or by peer evaluation. In the end, paradoxically perhaps, the study of politics derives its legitimacy on information that is carefully free from the meddling of political bodies. To conclude, the study of politics takes the support of truths deemed constructivists. Constructivism claims that truth and knowledge are created, not discovered and are part of a never-ending process where they constantly evolve according to new experiences. Even though constructivists truths could be seen as less legitimate it is in any means less universally valid.

Post-truth Era
Post truth can be defined as “Relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.”. The crisis of truth in politics can be linked to the 2016 presidential election, where according to PolitiFact, 70% of Trump’s statements were false or partly false. However, his popularity did not decline. This can be partly explained by the emergence on fake news on social media.

Because of the decline of traditional news media like journals and televisions, social media is for many, their main source of information. However, fake news poses a threat to democracy. Fake news spread six time faster than the truth on Twitter. During the 2016 election, “by a margin of 4 to 1, most fake news stories targeted Clinton’s campaign”. But for a democratic society to function, the citizens must be well informed, in order to make an informed choice when voting. If there are no objective facts on which the population can agree on, it is likely that humans will turn to confirmations bias. Confirmation bias is a psychological phenomenon where individuals interpret, believe and look for facts that confirm their pre-existing biases. This, in turn, leads to more political polarisation.

This phenomenon is reinforced by echo chambers or filter bubbles. Filter bubbles exist “where information, ideas or beliefs are amplified and reinforced by communication and repetition inside a defined system where competing views are underrepresented”. This means that users have access to less diversity in terms of opinions and are not exposed to competing views.

Graphic Arts: Truth or Illusion?
In 1929, the surrealist painter René Magritte painted The Treachery of Images, often referred to as "This is not a pipe". This painting expresses the concept that a representation of an object isn’t the object itself, which introduces the idea that graphic arts are just illusions of reality. Graphic arts include any form of visual art produced on flat surfaces. Although, we live in a three-dimensional world which automatically conveys the idea that any depiction of our world on a flat canvas is untrue. In a 1923 letter to Marcus de Zayas, Pablo Picasso stated “We all know that Art is not the truth. Art is a lie that makes us realise the truth.”. We can then ask ourselves what is that truth: is it an anatomical, positivist truth as shown in Leonardo da Vinci’s work Vitruvian Man or is it an interpretive, phenomenological truth according to how the artist perceives the reality around him, e.g. Picasso’s Guernica, a cubist portrayal of the bombing of Basque Country town during the Spanish civil war.

Another potential explanation may be that art offers us a constructivist truth : in 1873 Nietzsche said in On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense "Truth are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions". In that sense, an artist’s role is to trick the spectator into forgetting - or at least ignoring - the fact that their piece is not part of our reality.

Claude Monet, one of the most famous impressionists, epitomises that idea : focusing on what he sees and not on what he thinks he sees, Monet depicts movements and instability of things through visible paint strokes put together to form a truthful illusion of our reality, without questioning the resemblance (or not) with what we already know.

Here, truth is not determined by how well the artist recreates what he sees (photorealism) nor in contrast with the idea of a lie, but by how an artist captures the human experience, both as a unique and shared representation.


text:
User:Nicola.georgiou/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar group 7/ Evidence

= Evidence = In the context of academic research, evidence is concrete proof provided in support of a certain claim or hypothesis. Evidence falls into two sets of categories: primary or secondary and quantitative or qualitative. In the former case, primary evidence is presented by primary sources, which is considered to be the most reliable, whereas secondary evidence, hence, is provided by the secondary sources, which carry out a supplementary function, in addition to primary evidence. As for the latter category, quantitative evidence is given a statistical significance, being usually represented by numbers, whereas qualitative evidence could be characterized as an abstract concept which usually addresses more theoretical questions, often using a case study approach. However, evidence and the way in which it is collected must always be questioned. There must be an in-depth reflection on the technique (quantitative and qualitative) that is relevant to a particular context or discipline to ensure that information is not lost in the process.

This section presents approaches to evidence in different academic disciplines and their research methodologies.

Archaeology: the study of the past through physical evidence
Archaeology is the study of the past through physical evidence and this discipline largely relies on four types of evidence that form the archaeological record. Like today’s material world reflects our ways of living, the objects of the past also disclose precious information about past societies. To piece together the past, archaeologists firstly take support on portable objects, called artefacts. Artefacts are objects that have been manufactured or altered by humans. A sub-category of artefacts, called ‘features’, comprises less apparent relics such as imprints in-ground or carves in stones. They are also ‘tools’, objects like polished stones, and ‘manuports’, un-altered objects that have been displaced from their natural location to a new one by human intervention. Both tools and manuports inform on human activities. Architectural structures, often made of durable material, are also traces of past human civilization on which archaeologists base their study on. Lastly, there are ‘ecofacts’ which comprehends organic or inorganic residues and are evidence from the past wildlife and environmental conditions. Usually, archaeologists must combine multiple elements from the archaeological record to establish evidence in the discipline. To successfully identify a ‘manuport’ for instance, a good knowledge of the site itself, given through ecofacts, is required.

Social Anthropology: How Evidence is Collected and Used
Social anthropology focuses on the comparison of similarities and differences between societies. The type of evidence used has evolved alongside the rise and fall of anthropological theories.

In the 19th century, “armchair anthropology” was prevalent as anthropology focused on other, “primitive” cultures. Secondary evidence such as reports and accounts from explorers or informants in colonies was often used, especially by British anthropologists.

In contemporary social anthropology, the evidence is produced through ethnography. Typically, it involves fieldwork and utilises methods such as participant observation, interviews or collaboration with participants from the society studied. Apart from immersing an anthropologist in the society they study and allowing them to collect evidence from a native’s point of view, it also gives participants an active voice in a field rooted in colonialism and power imbalance, collecting evidence from multiple equal perspectives. Evidence produced can only be made sense of once placed into the context of its culture or society, or when compared with other similar societies.

Due to the rise of theories like cultural relativism, there is an understanding that social anthropology is a subjective discipline and is affected by the relationships an anthropologist has with participants during their study, leading to further reflection on how evidence is produced and used in social anthropology. Reflexivity arose as a result — awareness of power dynamics inherent in collected evidence can help to minimise the effect of a social anthropologist’s positionality on the data they collect, and how they interpret evidence. How evidence is collected and utilised is just as important as the evidence itself in social anthropology — reflexivity and comparatibility in modern social anthropology minimises the impact of the anthropologist’s own biases during their collection and usage of evidence.

Evidences in Sociology: How to collect, use and interpret them
In Sociology, quantitative evidence (data based on surveys, censuses and statistics) provide a great knowledge for studying large-scale social processes. Quantitative evidence is essential, as a single person’s study might not be representative of a whole. For example, if a sociologist wants to study the impact of structural changes in an economy on individuals, one person's account might not be representative of the society and social structures as a whole. That is why he needs quantitative evidence. On the other hand is qualitative evidence. Qualitative evidences are the information that can not be measured, it is what gives an insight of the context, the social phenomena and social scene of the study, and a meaning of their world. Qualitative evidence comes from fieldwork, participant observation, interviews, explicit or not, ethnography, but also from the writer’s point of view.

Qualitative and quantitative evidences are often complementary and essential, and one tend to be more important than the other depending on the situation. Evidence must be documented and collected with as much rigour as possible. This is Sociology as an Empirical discipline. Threw observed patterns, information from collected cases and experiences, you can draw evidence, but you can not through anecdotal, isolated reports. Evidence must always be conceptualized and well interpreted, it does not speak for itself. It is only a part of the circuit of knowledge. It is a support to advanced arguments, and the reader must always be aware that qualitative and quantitative evidences in sociology can always be badly interpreted: qualitative evidence seen by a sociologist may deviate from the reality as what he sees though his participant observation, or fieldwork is always interpreted in a way that may not fit reality. As to the quantitative evidence, sociologists can use surveys, censuses and statistics to support their argument in an environment for which those evidences are not intended.

Pharmacology: the evidence required for a drug to be approved
Pharmacology as a discipline is based on empirical, quantitive evidence that is collected throughout the preclinical and clinical stages of a drug trial. In a contemporary study, drugs go through successive phases before they are allowed onto the market, beginning with the pre-clinical trials that aim to discover aspects of the drug, such as toxicity, efficacy and other safety information, and if these are passed, the drugs move to clinical trials These experiments normally either occur “using in vitro (test tube or cell culture)” or “in vivo (animal)” methods, with new developments in technology also allowing some tests to be performed “in silico profiling using computer models of the drug-target interactions”. If a drug passes the pre-clinical testing, it then moves into clinical trials, which, in modern medicine, consists of five phases that must be fulfilled for a drug to be judged safe and effective for human use. In Phase 0, small quantities of the drug are given to very small focus groups of around 10 to 15 people, the purpose of which is to test how the drug is processed within the body. Phase 1 is done in slightly larger groups of 15 to 30 people, and attempts to find the optimum quantity of the drug; balancing side effects with the effectiveness of completing the drug's purpose. The phases progress up to Phase 4, where new FDA approved drugs are trialled on several hundreds of thousands of patients, the purpose of which is to attempt to discover any uncommon side effects that were not revealed in previous testing stages and learn more about both short and long term side effects of the drug.

This evidence-based research is an important development in modern medicine, as doctors would previously use value judgements and their personal experience with different treatment methods to decide how best to treat a patient, while the scientists working on drug testing see hundreds of thousands of patients and are able to assess the most effective drug based on extensive research and quantitative evidence. There have been major developments in the evidence required for pharmacology since the discipline arguably began in 1747, with scientist James Lind being the first person to conduct a clinical trial: he aimed to discover the optimum way of reducing scurvy onboard ships. In the 1800s there was the arrival of the concept of a placebo, which led to the developments in blind and double-blind trials, the first double-blind trial being in 1943, looking at the effectiveness of Patulin treatment for the common cold which are now requirements for evidence to be considered valid in modern pharmacology. Evidence is an essential aspect of the discipline, as without it drugs would not be allowed onto the market, and there is more weight placed on quantitative, verifiable evidence than qualitative statements.

Experimentation in scientific research : sustainability science
Sustainability science is now one of the most urgent research areas. There are interdisciplinary research approaches leading to the development of evidence and information in this field, ranging from science to more social aspects. Experimentation is the most used method for sustainability research because it leads researchers to evidence that could explain the causes and provide solutions to those issues.

However, it is a controversial methodology. This field aims to produce empirical evidence that would lead society towards sustainable development. Still, the blurred distinction between conventional projects and scientific experiments and how those compare to one another triggered criticism: the conceptual foundations of these experiments have been pointed out. Also, it has been highlighted that context and variables can be neglected during the study of those experiments. Sustainability research takes place in specific, complicit contexts, unlike any other scientific field and needs to be relevant to all, especially large corporations, to participate in a more active, process-oriented discipline. This goes against traditional science interpretations, where evidence is universal. The journal of cleaner production defined scientific experiments "as a scientific practice that relies primarily on an intervention, and that aims to produce empirical evidence."

That definition led to the development of a typology which helps compare, select, define and refine the different types of experiments, thereby generating evidence based-knowledge. Nowadays, scientists and practitioners acknowledge the importance of experimentation when searching for evidence in scientific research, especially in sustainability science.

Methodologies of Legal Studies: primary and secondary sources of legal research.
Legal studies as an academic field are concerned with looking into and commenting on national and international law, on rules and regulations and on case law. It seeks to find answers to such questions as: what would be the best way to draft a legislation? Which laws and regulations should be applied in a particular situation? Thus an investigation needs to be conducted. Legal research encompasses every step of the process that starts with a factual analysis of issues researched and concluding with the practical application and presentation of the findings.

Firstly, legal research involves developing a deep understanding of the law itself and how different aspects of it interact with each other. Hence, like in every other research, legal research methodologies are based upon using primary and secondary evidence, or data.

Primary Evidence
Primary sources, also called legal, comprise two aspects: Primary authority and Primary field sources. Primary authority is represented by the three governmental organs: the Judiciary, the Legislature and the Executive bodies. These actors are the ones who declare the primary field sources, which usually include: legislative enactments (statutory law), case law (opinions of the judiciary, common law or court decisions), as well as regulatory materials (administrative agency regulations and decisions) and constitutions. However, primary sources also fall into two categories. Some primary evidence is referred to as «mandatory», while others can have «persuasive» authority. The former is obligatory for the court to follow, as for the latter, the court has a choice whether to follow them or not.

Secondary Evidence
Secondary sources, also referred to as non-legal, are mainly analysis, summaries or commentaries, on law and used for citing the persuasive value. The secondary authority could be represented by NGOs, individuals and autonomous bodies. In contrast, secondary sources constitute materials such as textbooks, cases, digests, periodicals, journals, reports, encyclopedias, dictionaries, etc..

Approaches to research
Legal scholars doing the research usually follow two main types of methodologies: documentary research and field research. Documentary research includes doctrinal legal research and review of documentary materials. Whereas empirical, statistical, quantitative and non-doctrinal research, which are also used fall under the second category.

Forensic Science: Evidence in False Convictions
False convictions are most likely to occur due to (faulty) forensic evidence, second only to eyewitness testimony. The reason for this occurrence is due to forensic evidence being predominantly subjective in nature; fallacious forensic scientific tests and methods such as microscopic hair analysis, ballistics, handwriting and bite-mark comparisons, involve purely observational methods in which one compares the likeness of two objects, patterns or images. This method of determining ‘uniqueness’ of an object, person or circumstance is known as the forensic individualization theory which in itself has little to no scientific validity as it implies a certainty of knowledge and evidence which does not exist: “absolute specificity and absolute identification.”

Even DNA evidence - something which has proven useful in overturning wrongful convictions – can be unreliable as it lies in the realm of probability and interpretation. This concept of probability is becoming increasingly common as statisticians have become a fundamental part of trial procedures. Statistics, and more broadly, math, is used in courts as evidence of guilt or innocence and is often misused and misrepresented to sway a jury. An example of this is the case of Sally Clark who was falsely convicted of murder under the misconstrued statistic that there was a “1 in 73 million [chance] that she [was] innocent.”

Another facet to evidence in court cases is understanding who is generating this forensic evidence and how it is being represented and understood. This evidence, lacking in objective scientific methodology, relies on human interference and analysis; forensic experts are tasked with providing an educated analysis and opinion on whether a pattern or match exists, meaning that evidence is no longer neutral or separate of objectivity. Evidence is interpreted through filters, one of which is often the pressure put on crime analysts to provide scientific evidence to corroborate already presumed innocence or guilt. The seemingly malleable and fallacious nature of forensic science provides an explanation for the prevalence of false convictions.

Psychology: Reliability of Eyewitness testimony
Eyewitness testimony is highly important in criminal trials as it is often used as evidence to build a criminal case and can be the main evidence in a conviction. However, psychologists have questioned the reliability of such testimonies.

To begin with, the psychological state of the witness affects his or her ability to perceive and remember an incident. A study on the impact of anxiety and life stress on an eyewitness's testimony revealed that if the witness was stressed or anxious, he may be less attentive to important clues related to the task and therefore miss information crucial to the witness's task.

Furthermore, psychologists have questioned the reliability of the memory of a witness. In a study on the psychology of eyewitness testimony, Jack P. Lipton showed that when there is a delay between the eyewitness's observation and his testimony, the accuracy and quantity of the testimony is significantly impacted. The experiment involved 40 men and 40 women who had to watch a film in which a man is killed and robbed. The subjects all believed that the film was a real event. Then they had to testify in 'trial' either immediately or one week after the event. It was found that after a delay of one week, "the accuracy was 4.3% less than when immediately tested and the quantity was 18.0% less after the delay".

Finally, the type of questions asked by the prosecutor or lawyer to the witness can shape his or her testimony. If the witness is asked leading questions, which means a question where the desired answer is suggested or the witness is led to the answer, his or her testimony can be distorted and shaped.

Psychology: Validity of Evidence in Psychological Research
There is a fine line in psychological research between following the ethical guidelines of the British Psychological Society (BPS) and maintaining the highest level of validity possible, as often these two necessities can counteract each other. For example, guidelines express the need for fully informed consent from participants in a psychological investigation, however, this can often cause participants to show demand characteristics and behave differently towards the situation to how they normally would , calling into question the validity of any evidence collected, as it may not be an accurate representation of human behaviour.

There are two types of evidence within psychology, in the forms of primary and secondary data. The validity of these can be called into question in different ways; for example, primary data, collected by the psychologist for their specific investigation, can have a lower level of validity due to the methodological constraints of getting informed consent. This can be avoided through the use of deception, and whilst this is also technically not advised in the BPS guidelines, psychologists can deem it necessary on the grounds that it may be the only way to carry out their research. Using deception can call validity into question again, as it can be argued that experimenters are not necessarily measuring what they intend to measure if they have to act through the guise of measuring something else - however through peer review processes and appropriate experimental design, often the benefits of the research outweigh the costs, and so the evidence can be viewed as having high validity.

The validity of evidence from secondary data is often questionable as more often than not, the data being used has not been collected for the sole purpose of the investigation, and is being reinterpreted from its original study that had a different aim. Whilst this can be a positive as it highlights the interdisciplinary nature of psychology, allowing collaboration which a range of other disciplines such as economics and geography, and also has often already been through statistical analysis meaning its significance is already known , it also introduces a subjectivity towards the data and once again raises the question whether the experimenters are measuring what they intend to measure, especially considering they are not doing the actual data collection themselves.

Historical Evidence: the paradigmatic shift from archival to quantitative data
History is a dynamic discipline which has changed (in terms of paradigm and evidence) according to time and context. The idea of evidence in history was well discussed by Leopold Ranke in the 19th century. For Ranke archival data was the main evidence of historical research. With Thomas Khun’s introduction of a discipline’s paradigm in the 20th century, archival data has been paired by many other sources of information. The most important paradigm shift in history has probably been the increasing introduction of quantitative data. This numeric information, based on statistics, demographic sources or more sophisticated mathematical models, form the evidence of the modern discipline. Historians are supposed to use interdisciplinary thinking to catalogue, compare and contrast this evidence in such a way that data can hold significance and lead to a meaningful mapping of the information. In my previous sandbox, I have reported statistics from a National Geographic article which discussed how American cities flattened the curve in 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic. The numbers regarding Philadelphia, New York or San Francisco are the quantitative evidence that we can use to study contemporary data in the time of Covid19 pandemic. Quantitative data can also be used according to a contrast/comparison analysis between past and present.

= References =