Search

Search Results

• The relationship between scientific philosophical theories and value research

  131-147

  Benedek Dudik

  Views:

  89

  The purpose of this study is to examine, in what extent the mainstream approaches of scientific
  theories can be applied on the field of the value-research. Therefore, I will examine these models
  through the lense of scientific philosophical approaches of 20th century. Of the three most
  significant philosophical theory (Popper’s falsification theory, Kuhn’s paradigm theory, and Imre
  Lakatos’s theory of scientific research programs), I apply Lakatos’s theory, since it fits the best
  to explain, how parallel research streams emerged on the field of value research. In this study I
  strive for conciliate Lakatos’s program and the three significant value models. In the scientific
  research program theory Lakatos found that many research programs coexist simultaneously.
  Each has a hard core or negative heuristic (as Lakatos calls it) of theories immune to any revision
  surrounded by a protective belt or positive heuristic of malleable theories. Every research
  program vies against others to be most progressive. In my opinion the core of the program is
  the value definition itself, which is used by the different researchers in the field of value studies.
  This value definition barely changed during the past few decades. On the other hand, there are
  numerous value models aimed to assess people’s value system. These models can be considered
  as the protective belt revolving around the hardcore definition. The aim of this paper is not to
  emphasize Lakatos’ theory from the philosophical approaches of science, but to examine value
  research through a philosophical eye. This approach also can ease the communication between
  the value research by exploring the common core of them.

• Thomas Hobbes and the dilemmas of the natural state: First chapter – The axiomatic nature of total war

  3-24

  Levente Nagy

  Views:

  70

  The purpose of this paper is to reflect on some the ideas of Thomas Hobbes, one of the founders
  of modern political philosophy, best known for his masterpiece, Leviathan. The aim of this essay
  is not to provide a full scale analysis of Hobbes’ main work, nor to present his moral or political
  philosophy, nor to reflect on the significance of his impact on later political thinkers. The aim is
  more modest, and the theme under scrutiny is more narrow: the paper is devoted to a critical
  analysis of the main premise (state of the nature) of Hobbes’ theory of power, including the
  ambivalent character of the state of nature, as well as the logical dilemmas that arise during
  the analysis.

  After a general presentation of Hobbes’s philosophy and of the logical construction of his
  work, I will tend to focus on two aspects of the state of nature: firstly, I will analyse the assumed
  analogy between the state of nature and the Book of Genesis; secondly, I will examine whether
  the „war of all against all” is an axiomatic outcome of the „primitive” state. It turns out, that the
  answers for these questions are not so unanbiguous.