What We Think We Are: Maximizing the Subjects in the Human Sciences.

The human sciences, differ from the natural in significant ways. The complexity of subject matter may be to blame. Bases of controlled experiments differ, some humansubjects research hard to control, and there are moral constraints on what can be done to a human research-subject. Human-science subje...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Annals of Philosophy, Social & Human Disciplines Vol. 1; pp. 1 - 34
Autor principal: FLEMING MILLER, Lantz
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Suceava: "Stefan cel Mare" University 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=159155215&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 159155215
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        20694008
        FIAT
      jtl: Annals of Philosophy, Social & Human Disciplines
      issn: 20694008
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: 2022
      vid: 1
      pid: 58683
      pub: Suceava: "Stefan cel Mare" University
    artinfo:
      ui: 159155215
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 33
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 2.6MB
      tig:
        atl: What We Think We Are: Maximizing the Subjects in the Human Sciences.
      aug:
        au: FLEMING MILLER, Lantz
        affil: Ashoka University, Department of Philosophy Haryana, India
      su:
        Anthroposophy
        Idea (Philosophy)
      sug:
        subj:
          Anthroposophy
          Idea (Philosophy)
      keyword:
        epistemic predicament
        grouping by natural kinds
        grouping by social construction
        objectifying vs. introspection / subjectifying
        self-identity
      ab: The human sciences, differ from the natural in significant ways. The complexity of subject matter may be to blame. Bases of controlled experiments differ, some humansubjects research hard to control, and there are moral constraints on what can be done to a human research-subject. Human-science subjects have a peculiar trait: Subjects' concepts concerning themselves play into what they are, even if some such concepts are false. The human sciences, in their struggle for objectivity, often commonly have allowed only limited role for subjects' concepts about themselves. This article contends that a significant amount of peoples' ideas and theories do influence their behavior - and most significantly, those ideas about themselves or reflexive concepts. Taking into account subjects' ideas of themselves appears to be needed in much human-sciences research to maximize study accuracy and completion.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Annals of Philosophy, Social & Human Disciplines is the property of Suceava: "Stefan cel Mare" University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Annals of Philosophy, Social & Human Disciplines
      holder: Suceava: "Stefan cel Mare" University
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2022
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N