PROBLEMS ALL DAY LONG WOUT ULTEE ICS THEORY COURSE SEPTEMBER 17, 2008

PROBLEMS

PROBLEMS

PROBLEMS

ALL DAY LONG

WOUT ULTEE

ICS THEORY COURSE

SEPTEMBER 17, 2008

PROBLEMS

PROBLEMS

PROBLEMS

ALL DAY LONG

(the Everly Brothers)

PROBLEMS

PROBLEMS

PROBLEMS

ALL DAY LONG?

FOUR YEARS LONG!

PROBLEMS

PROBLEMS

PROBLEMS

ALL DAY LONG?

FOUR YEARS LONG!

(ICS juniors)

YOU WILL ALREADY KNOW A LOT ABOUT BAD AND GOOD RESEARCH

FROM YOUR BACHELOR AND MASTER

WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT BAD AND GOOD THEORIES?

NOT FROM A SUBSTANTIVE, BUT FROM A FORMAL POINT OF VIEW?

AND WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT BAD AND BETTER PROBLEMS?

LINDENBERG:

RESEARCH SHOULD BE THEORY-GUIDED

AND THE BEST THEORY TO GUIDE RESEARCH IS RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY

ULTEE:

THEORY-BUILDING SHOULD BE PROBLEM-DRIVEN

AND THE FAMILY OF RATIONAL ACTION THEORIES HAS BEEN IN SEARCH OF

PROBLEMS

WHEREAS SOCIOLOGY HAS A CATALOG OF CLASSICAL QUESTIONS

THE THINGS TO DO TODAY:

•MY DIAGNOSIS OF AND MY REMEDY FOR WHAT IS WRONG WITH CONTEMPORARY SOCIOLOGY

•OVERARCHING PROBLEMS AND SUBPROBLEMS

•FILLING IN ALL THE BLANKS OF QUESTIONS

•THE SEQUENCE OF RAISING QUESTIONS

•THE BACKGROUND OF QUESTIONS

•GENERATIONS OF QUESTIONS

•CONTRADICTIONS AS THE BEST QUESTIONS

SOCIOLOGY WAS AND IS MESSY

ONCE IT WAS HELD THAT SOCIOLOGY IS MESSY

BECAUSE IT DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT VIEW OF THE RELATION BETWEEN

THEORY AND RESEARCH

THE SOLUTION, BORROWED FROM PSYCHOLOGY, WAS TO OPERATIONALIZE

CONCEPTS RELIABLY AND VALIDLY

AND GEAR RESEARCH TOWARDS REPLICATION

HOWEVER, THE LITERATURE ON RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY IS A MESS

AND MORE IS GOING ON IN RESEARCH THAN REPLICATION

A THEORY IS MORE THAN A SYSTEM OF CONCEPTS

SOCIOLOGY HAS TOO MANY CONCEPTS WITHOUT PROPOSITIONS

A THEORY IS A SYSTEM OF PROPOSITIONS

AND SOME PROPOSITIONS ARE RICHER IN CONTENT THAN OTHERS

WITH THE LESS INFORMATIVE PROPOSITIONS BEING DERIVABLE FORM THE MORE INFORMATIVE PROPOSITIONS

LATER RESEARCH PROVIDES STRONGER TESTS OF PROPOSITIONS

TESTS OF PROPOSITIONS ARE MORE SEVERE IF A PROPOSITION IS

CONFRONTED WITH AN ALTERNATIVE PROPOSITION

THESE ALTERNATIVE PROPOSITIONS MAY IMPLY THAT SEEMINGLY VALID

OPERATIONALIZATIONS ARE SOMETIMES OFF THE MARK

THE FIRST OFF THE MARK OPERATIONALIZATION

SHOULD STATUS BE MEASURED AS OCCUPATION, AS EDUCATION OR AS INCOME?

OLD SOLUTION: MAKE A SCALE OF ALL THREE DIMENSIONS

TAKE EACH DIMENSION AS HAVING THREE CATEGORIES: HIGH, MIDDLE, LOW

LATER CRITICISM: A PERSON WHO IS HIGH ON INCOME AND LOW ON EDUCATION IS LUMPED IN THE SAME FINAL CATEGORY AS A PERSON WITH

MIDDLE EDUCATION AND MIDDLE INCOME

YET THE HYPOTHESIS OF STATUS INCONSISTENCY SAYS THAT THE VOTING BEHAVIOUR OF THESE

PEOPLE WILL BE QUITE DIFFERENT

NEW SOLUTION: KEEP DIMENSIONS SEPARATE SO THAT THE STATUS INCONSISTENCY HYPOTHESIS

CAN BE TESTED

THE SECOND OFF THE MARK OPERATIONALIZATION

SHOULD CULTURAL PARTICIPATION BE MEASURED AS VISITING PLAYS, OR VISITING CLASSICAL CONCERTS, OR VISITING MUSEUMS?

OLD SOLUTION: MAKE A SCALE OF ALL THREE DIMENSIONS

LATER QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED AFTER IT WAS FOUND THAT CULTURAL PARTICIPATION IS HIGHER IF A PERSON HAS MORE

EDUCATION:

DOES RELIGION KEEP PEOPLE FROM CULTURAL PARTICIPATION?

HYPOTHESIS: ORTHODOX PROPESTANT PERSONS SHUN PLAYS, BUT LIKE CLASSICAL CONCERTS

THE SCALE IS NOT ATTUNED TO TESTING THIS HYPOTHESIS, ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TREATED AS EQUAL

SOLUTION: KEEP DIMENSIONS SEPARATE SO THAT THE HYPOTHESIS ABOUT ORTHODOX PROPESTANTS CAN BE TESTED

NOT: R1 R2

BUT: T1

T2

R1

R2

REPLICATION VERSUS

SEVERE TESTING

IN ADDITION, SOCIOLOGY IS A MESS BECAUSE THE RELATION BETWEEN ITS

THEORIES OFTEN IS UNCLEAR

RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY

?? ?? ?? ??

DURKHEIM’S DURKHEIM’S

INTEGRATION ANOMIE

THEORY THEORY

OF SUICIDE OF SUICIDELOOSE PROPOSITIONS VERSUS

DERIVABLE PROPOSITIONS

T1

T2 T3

T4 T5 T6 T7 T8

THE STRUCTURE OF DURKHEIM’S INTEGRATION THEORY OF SUICIDE:

LEVELS OF CONTENT (AND GENERALITY)

NORMS ON SUICIDE

INTEGRATION IN CHURCH,

FAMILY

RELIGION, MARRIAGE

APART FROM T’S AND R’S, THERE ARE P’S

THEORIES ARE THERE TO SOLVE PROBLEMS

THE EXPRESSION THAT THEORY T1 DOES NOT SOLVE PROBLEM P1

CAN MEAN TWO THINGS:

* IT MAKES PREDICTIONS THAT ARE OFF THE MARK

* IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY PREDICTIONS AT ALL ON A CERTAIN TOPIC

THE FIRST CASE INDICATES THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG WITH T1

THE SECOND CRITICISM AMOUNTS TO SAYING THAT IT IS DIFFICULT TO EAT SOUP

WITH A KNIFE

BUT SOME THEORIES MAY SOLVE MORE PROBLEMS THAN

OTHER THEORIES, AND THE MORE PROBLEMS A THEORY

SOLVES, THE BETTER

P1

P2 T1

P3

RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY SHOULD BE SUCH A UNIFYING THEORY

MAKING SOCIOLOGY LESS MESSY

SOCIOLOGY IS MESSY MAINLY BECAUSE ITS CATALOG OF

PROBLEMS SEEMS FAR TOO LONG, WITHOUT APPARENT LINKS

BETWEEN PROBLEMS

HOWEVER, THERE ARE LINKS BETWEEN SOCIOLOGY’S PROBLEMS:

FOR INSTANCE, THERE ARE OVERARCHING PROBLEMS AND

SUBPROBLEMS

THE EMERGENCE OF THE PROBLEM OF COHESION


HOBBES’ WAR OF ALL AGAINST ALL AND OF RULERS AGAINST RULERS



LOCKE’S REBELLION OF SUBJECTS AGAINST RULERS




BENTHAM’S SWIFT, SEVERE AND CERTAIN SENTENCING




BENTHAM’S SWIFT, SEVERE AND CERTAIN SENTENCES

DURKHEIM’S SUICIDE




BENTHAM’S SWIFT, SEVERE AND CERTAIN SENTENCES

COHESION

DURKHEIM’S SUICIDE

ONCE MORE DURKHEIM ON COHESION


VIOLENCE AGAINST OTHERS


ECONOMIC TIES

THROUGH THE

DIVISION OF LABOUR



ECONOMIC TIES

THROUGH THE

DIVISION OF LABOUR

SUICIDE AS CUTTING THE LAST

TIE TO SOCIETY



ECONOMIC TIES

THROUGH THE

DIVISION OF LABOUR


TIE TO SOCIETY

PARTAKING IN

RELIGIOUS RITES



ECONOMIC TIES

THROUGH THE DIVISION

OF LABOUR


TIE TO SOCIETY

PARTAKING IN

RELIGIOUS RITES

MARRIAGE AND

DIVORCE



ECONOMIC TIES


OF LABOUR


TIE TO SOCIETY

PARTAKING IN

RELIGIOUS RITES

MARRIAGE AND

DIVORCE

VIOLENCE AGAINST OTHERS ISOLATION


COHESION

ECONOMIC TIES


OF LABOUR


TIE TO SOCIETY

PARTAKING IN

RELIGIOUS RITES

MARRIAGE AND

DIVORCE

VIOLENCE AGAINST OTHERS ISOLATION

PROBLEM STRUCTURES AND THEIR DYNAMICS

P7

P2 P3 P4 P5

P1 P6

BAD AND BETTER QUESTIONS:

FILLING IN ALL THE BLANKS

PSYCHOLOGY IS ABOUT HUMAN BEINGS

SOCIOLOGY IS ABOUT HUMAN SOCIETIES

TRUE, BUT THE STUDY OF SOCIETIES IS NOT A FULL-FLEDGED PROBLEM

IT IS AT BEST THE SPECIFICATION OF THE OBJECT TO BE STUDIED



SOCIOLOGY STUDIES HOW SOCIETIES FUNCTION

THAT DOES NOT SAY MUCH: FUNCTIONING IS NOT YET A

VARIABLE FEATURE OF SOCIETIES



SOCIOLOGY STUDIES THE FREQUENCY WITH WHICH EACH

PARTICULAR PENAL LAW OF INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES IS

TRESPASSED

HERE A VARIABLE FEATURE OF SOCIETIES IS SPECIFIED



SOCIOLOGY STUDIES THE FREQUENCY WITH WHICH EACH

PARTICULAR PENAL LAW OF INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES IS

TRESPASSED

HERE THE SOCIETAL PHENOMENON TE BE EXPLAINED IS SPECIFIED

BUT NO HINT IS GIVEN OF THE FACTOR(S) DOING THE

EXPLANATION



WHY IS IN 2005 THE MURDER RATE IN THE USA AND RUSSIA HIGHER THAN IN THE NETHERLANDS AND

SWEDEN?

THIS IS AN EXPLANATORY QUESTION, BUT NO CAUSES ARE

SPECIFIED



IS IN 2005 THE MURDER RATE IN THE USA AND RUSSIA HIGHER THAN IN THE

NETHERLANDS AND SWEDEN,

BECAUSE THE FIRST TWO COUNTRIES HAVE LENIENT LAWS ON GUN

OWNERSHIP, WHILE THE LAST TWO HAVE RESTRICTIVE LAWS?

THIS QUESTION SPECIFIES A POSSIBLE CAUSE

FROM DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS

BY WAY OF COMPARARIVE QUESTIONS AND TREND QUESTIONS

TO DEEPER AND DEEPER EXPLANATORY QUESTIONS

DEPTH HAS NO END

STOPPING RULES ARE ARBITRARY

AND SOCIALLY CONSTRUCTED

HOW HIGH IS IN 2005 THE MURDER RATE IN THE NETHERLANDS?

THIS IS A DESCRIPTIVE QUESTION

THE DESCRIPTION MAY NOT BE EASY

MURDER RATES IN THE STATISTICS OF DEATH CAUSES MAY DIFFER

FROM MURDER RATES IN POLICE STATISTICS AND

FROM MURDER RATES IN CONVICTION STATISTICS

TO WHAT EXTENT DOES THE DUTCH 2005 MURDER RATE DIFFER FROM

THE DUTCH MURDER RATE IN 2000?

THIS IS A TREND QUESTION

TO WHAT EXTENT DOES THE DUTCH 2005 MURDER RATE DIFFER FROM

THE MURDER RATES FOR THAT YEAR IN RUSSIA, SWEDEN AND THE

UNITED STATES?

THIS IS A COMPARATIVE QUESTION

A TREND QUESTION PRESUPPOSES AN ANSWER TO A

DESCRIPTIVE QUESTION

AND SO DOES A COMPARATIVE QUESTION

IF THE DESCRIPTIVE ANSWER IS FALSE

THEN THE TREND QUESTION AND THE COMPARATIVE QUESTION ARE

MISGUIDED

IS THE DUTCH 2005 MURDER RATE LOWER THAN THE UNITED STATES 2005

MURDER RATE BECAUSE GUNS ARE MORE FREELY AVAILABLE IN THE USA

THAN IN THE NETHERLANDS?

THIS IS AN EXPLANATORY QUESTION

THIS EXPLANATORY QUESTION PRESUPPOSES AN ANSWER TO A

COMPARATIVE QUESTION

IF THE ANSWER TO THE COMPARATIVE QUESTION IS FALSE, THE EXPLANATORY

QUESTION IS MISGUIDED

WHY WOULD LESS STRINGENT LAWS ON GUN OWNERSHIP MAKE FOR HIGHER

MURDER RATES?

THIS IS A DEEPER EXPLANATORY QUESTION

IF THE ANSWER TO THE MORE SUPERFICIAL EXPLANATORY QUESTION IS FALSE, THE DEEPER EXPLANATORY

QUESTION IS MISGUIDED

TRY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE

TO CHECK THE

IMPORTANT ASSUMPTIONS OF

YOUR QUESTIONS

DURKHEIM AIMED FOR DEEPER EXPLANATIONS

HIS STOPPING RULE WAS THAT SOCIETAL PHENOMENA ARE TO BE EXPLAINED BY OTHER SOCIETAL

PHENOMENA

THE INDIVIDUALIST PROGRAM IN SOCIOLOGY HOLDS THAT

SOCIETAL EXPLANATIONS DO NOT GO DEEP ENOUGH

ONLY EXPLANATIONS OF SOCIETAL PHENOMENA ARE

ACCEPTABLE WHICH GO BACK TO THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL

THE RATIONAL CHOICE PROGRAM IN SOCIOLOGY HOLDS THAT INDIVIDUAL

EXPLANATIONS OF SOCIETAL PHENOMENA ARE NOT ALWAYS

ACCEPTABLE

THEY SHOULD ALWAYS INVOLVE THE ASSUMPTION THAT INDIVIDUALS ACT

IN A RATIONAL WAY

THE EVOLUTIONARY PROGRAM IN SOCIOLOGY HOLDS THAT INDIVIDUAL

EXPLANATIONS OF SOCIETAL PHENOMENA ARE NOT ALWAYS

ACCEPTABLE

THEY SHOULD ALWAYS INVOLVE THE SELECTIVE EFFECTS OF THE

ENVIRONMENT ON INDIVIDUALS

(PEOPLE ARE NOT ALWAYS RATIONAL, AND IF THEY ARE NOT RATIONAL

THEIR REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS WILL BE LIMITED)

THE QUEST FOR DEPTH IS WORTHWHILE BECAUSE A DEEPER EXPLANATION MODIFIES THE MORE

SUPERFICIAL EXPLANATION

HOWEVER, WHETHER THIS LOGICAL POSSIBILITY FREQUENLTY OCCURS

IS ANOTHER MATTER

THE POINT IS NOT TO EXPLAIN SOCIETAL PHENOMENA BY INDIVIDUAL ASSUMPTIONS

THE POINT IS TO INTERPRETE ABSOLUTE PROPERTIES OF SOCIETIES AS RELATIONAL PROPERTIES OF SOCIETIES

AND TO EXPLAIN THESE RELATIONAL SOCIETAL PROPERTIES BY

PROPOSITIONS INVOKING THE RELATIONS BETWEEN THE MEMBERS

OF A SOCIETY

THIS RULE HAS TWO CONTRASTS:

SOCIETIES, INDIVIDUALS AND THE MEMBERS OF A SOCIETY

AND THE ABSOLUTE PROPERTIES OF SOCIETIES AND OF INDIVIDUALS

AND THE RELATIONAL PROPERTIES OF INDIVIDUALS AND SOCIETIES

(THE ERROR OF HUMMELL AND OPP, THE REDUCTION OF SOCIOLOGY TO PSYCHOLOGY FROM 1968, IS TO BYPASS

THE RULE TO INTERPRET ABSOLUTE PROPERTIES AS RELATIONAL PROPERTIES)

SO, A QUESTION HAS A BACKGROUND

AND THAT BACKGROUND MAY CONTAIN FALSE OR OTHERWISE MISLEADING

ASSUMPTIONS

EXAMPLE:

FIVE GENERATIONS IN SOCIAL MOBILITY RESEARCH

AT ISSUE IS HERE NOT THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN DESCRIPTIVE AND EXPLANATORY QUESTIONS,

NOR THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SUPERFICIAL AND DEEPER QUESTIONS

FIRST GENERATION SOCIAL MOBILITY QUESTIONS AS POSED BY LIPSET IN 1959

WHY ARE SOME MEMBERS OF A SOCIETY UPWARDLY MOBILE, OTHERS DOWNWARDLY MOBILE, YET

OTHERS STATIONARY?

WHY ARE THERE MORE UPWARDLY MOBILE PERSONS IN SOME SOCIETIES THAN IN OTHER SOCIETIES?

THESE QUESTIONS ARE MISGUIDED BECAUSE THEY BYPASS THE POSSIBILITY OF BOTTOM AND CEILING

EFFECTS, LUMP HETEROGENEOUS PERSONS TOGETHER AS STATIONARY, AND NEGLECT

DISTRIBUTIONAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SOCIETIES

SECOND GENERATION SOCIAL MOBILITY QUESTION AS POSED BY DUNCAN IN 1967

TO WHAT EXTENT DOES IN A SOCIETY AT A CERTAIN POINT IN TIME A PERSON’S

DESTINATION DEPEND UPON THIS PERSON’S ORIGIN?

SINCE THIS QUESTION AVOIDS DIFFERENCE SCORES (AS MOBILITY

SCORES ARE) THERE ARE NO BOTTOM AND CEILING EFFECTS

AND THE MEASURE OF ASSOCIATION BETWEEN ORIGIN AND DESTINATION MAY

BE DISTRIBUTION FREE

THIRD GENERATION SOCIAL MOBILITY QUESTION AS POSED BY GOLDTHORPE IN 1980

TO WHAT EXTENT HAVE THE VARIOUS COMPETITIONS BETWEEN THE MEMBERS OF SOCIETIES FROM DIFFERENT ORIGINS FOR

DIFFERENT DESTINATIONS THE SAME UNEQUAL OUTCOMES?

IT IS MISLEADING TO COMPUTE CORRELATION AND REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS FOR THE

EFFECT OF ORIGINS ON DESTINATIONS BECAUSE EFFECTS MAY DIFFER IN STRENGTH ALONG THE OCCUPATIONAL STATUS SCALE

FOURTH GENERATION SOCIAL MOBILITY QUESTION AS POSED BY MAYER AND

BLOSSFELD IN 1988

TO WHAT EXTENT DOES THE OCCUPATIONAL STATUS RIGHT NOW OF THE MEMBERS OF A SOCIETY BELONGING TO THE SAME BIRTH

COHORT DEPEND UPON THEIR ORIGIN STATUS?

MOBILITY ALWAYS REFERS TO TWO POINTS IN TIME, AND WHEN EARLIER GENERATIONS COMPARED ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS,

THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THESE TWO POINTS IN TIME WAS NOT THE SAME

FIFTH GENERATION SOCIAL MOBILITY QUESTION NOT EXPLICITLY POSED UNTIL NOW

TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THE OCCUPATIONAL CAREERS OF PERSONS BELONGING TO THE

SAME BIRTH COHORT OF A PARTICULAR SOCIETY SELF-REINFORCING PROCESSES?

APART FROM INTERGENERATIONAL MOBILITY AND ORIGIN EFFECTS THERE IS INTRAGENERATIONAL MOBILITY

AND INTERGENERATIONAL MOBILITY AND INTRAGENERATIONAL MOBILITY SHOULD BE STUDIED SEPARATELY, TAKING THE LENGTH OF A PERSON’S WORK LIFE INTO ACCOUNT

FIFTH GENERATION MOBILITY QUESTION NOT EXPLICITLY POSED UNTIL NOW

TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THE OCCUPATIONAL CAREERS OF PERSONS BELONGING TO THE SAME BIRTH COHORT OF A PARTICULAR SOCIETY SELF-

REINFORCING PROCESSES?

DO NOT HUNT FOR CAREER PATTERNS BY APPLYING CLUSTER TECHNIQUES

THESE TECHNIQUES ARE THEORETCALLY BLIND AND NOT ATTUNED TO THE PROBLEM AT HAND

WHEREAS RESEARCH SHOULD BE THEORY- GUIDED AND PROBLEM-DRIVEN

REALLY BAD QUESTIONS:

TUNNEL VISION QUESTIONS

OR ONE-TRACK-MIND QUESTIONS

WHY DOES THE EXPLOITED WORKING CLASS REMAIN PASSIVE?

(THE WORKING CLASS IS NOT EXPLOITED!)

WHICH SELECTIVE INCENTIVE MAKES PEOPLE JOIN GREENPEACE?

(SHOULD A SELECTIVE INCENTIVE ALWAYS BE THE CAUSE OF JOINING?)

THE ONE BUT BEST QUESTIONS:

THE INCOMPATIBILITY BETWEEN TWO

EXPLANATIONS OF THE SAME RESEARCH FINDING

SUCH INCOMPATABILITIES SOMETIMES ARE CALLED

ISSUES

THE BEST QUESTIONS:

CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN

A NOT SO BAD HYPOTHESIS

AND

RESEARCH FINDINGS

SUCH CONTRADICTIONS SOMETIMES ARE CALLED ANOMALIES OR PUZZLES

WHY IS THE PERCENTAGE OF DUTCH JEWS WHO SURVIVED

WORLD WAR 2 (20)

MUCH LOWER THAN THE PERCENTAGES FOR BELGIUM (50)

AND FRANCE (70)

AND ALMOST AS LOW AS THE PERCENTAGE FOR POLAND (10)?

THIS EXPLANATORY QUESTION GAINS ITS URGENCY FROM DUTCH

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

THE QUESTION OF THE SURVIVAL RATE SOF DUTCH

JEWS

GAINS EXPLANATORY URGENCY AGAINST THE

BACKGROUND OF

HYPOTHESES DEVELOPED AND TESTED BY THE SOCIOLOGIST

HELEN FEIN

IN ACCOUNTING FOR GENOCIDE FROM 1978

FEIN’S TWO HYPOTHESES

SURVIVAL RATES ARE LOWER IN A COUNTRY

IF THAT COUNTRY BEFORE WORLD WAR 2 HAD MORE VOTES

FOR ANTI-SEMITIC PARTIES

AND IF THAT COUNTRY DURING WORLD WAR 2 EXPERIENCED A

STRONG SS-INFLUENCE

IN A COUNTRY COMPARISON

THESE TWO HYPOTHESES DID QUITE WELL

FEIN CONSIDERED THE NETHERLANDS TO BE A COUNTRY LOW IN ANTI-SEMITISM AND WITH A

MODERATE SS-INFLUENCE

THE NETHERLANDS WAS ON OUTLIER ON HER PLOT

THE PERCENTAGE OF JEWISH VICTIMS WAS MUCH HIGHER

THAN PREDICTED

DEEPER RESEARCH QUESTION:

WAS THE PERCENTAGE OF JEWISH VICTIMS SO HIGH IN THE NETHERLANDS

BECAUSE THE NETHERLANDS WAS MORE ANTI-SEMITIC THAN FEIN SUPPOSED?

OR BECAUSE THE NETHERLANDS EXPERIENCED MORE SS-INFLUENCE THAN

FEIN SUPPOSED?

OR BECAUSE THE DUTCH FIGURES USED BY FEIN ARE OVERESTIMATES?

OF BECAUSE FEIN LEFT OUT A THIRD FACTOR?

DAWKINGS, THE GOD DELUSION, 2006 DWAKINS IS A BIOLOGIST AND AN ATHEIST

ATHEITIST POINT TOWARS SUCH THINGS AS RELIGIOUS WARS

BIOLOGISTS USE EVIOLUTIONARY THEORIES, AND SOMETHING PERSISTS

BECAUSE IT HAS SURVIVAL VALUE

A RELIGION IS SOMETHING, SO AN AHTEIST BIOLOGIST SEEMS IN DIFFICULTY

DAWKINS, PAGE 172:

When we ask about the survival value of anything, we may be asking the wrong

question. We need to rewrite the question in a more helpful way. Perhaps the feature we are interested in (religion in this case) does not have a direct survival value of its own, but is a by-product of something else

that does.

What doe you think of this problem shift?

FOR THE COMING WEEKS:

LOOK AT YOUR OWN ICS PROBLEM AS A SPECIFIC INSTANCE OF AN OVERARCHING PROBLEM AND

DETERMINE WHETHER THIS HELPS YOU ARTICULATING YOUR OWN ICS

PROBLEM


BREAK YOUR OWN ICS PROBLEM DOWN INTO

SUBPROBLEMS


SEE HOW MANY BLANKS YOU HAVE FILLED IN OF YOUR OWN

ICS PROBLEM


TRY TO FORMULATE YOUR OWN ICS PROBLEM AS AN ISSUE AND

AS A PUZZLE

Documents

PROBLEMS ALL DAY LONG WOUT ULTEE ICS THEORY COURSE SEPTEMBER 17, 2008