Applications of the Axiomatic Method in Social Science: The Declaration of Independence, Einstein and Ethics, and Balance and Dissonance Attitude Theories

S. Levy
{"title":"Applications of the Axiomatic Method in Social Science: The Declaration of Independence, Einstein and Ethics, and Balance and Dissonance Attitude Theories","authors":"S. Levy","doi":"10.13189/ujp.2017.050501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The value of the axiomatic method in conjunction with Muncaster's PropCalc Workplace to analyze and increase the precision of social science theory is illustrated through applications that include political philosophy, ethical reasoning, and theories of attitude change. All of the examples were originally expressed through verbal statements. A formal logical analysis is applied to the US Declaration of Independence which provides a set of propositions upon which governments are based, Einstein's essay on the laws of science and the laws of ethics, and basic concepts of balance and dissonance theories of attitude change. In each case, symbolic representations of the verbal language are then subjected to analysis for consistency and redundancy among the propositions and sample conclusions from each model are presented. The Muncaster's PropCalc is a valuable aid in identifying the integrity and consequences of the models. The discussion includes an examination of the relationship between the models and their correspondence with reality.","PeriodicalId":23456,"journal":{"name":"Universal Journal of Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Universal Journal of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13189/ujp.2017.050501","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The value of the axiomatic method in conjunction with Muncaster's PropCalc Workplace to analyze and increase the precision of social science theory is illustrated through applications that include political philosophy, ethical reasoning, and theories of attitude change. All of the examples were originally expressed through verbal statements. A formal logical analysis is applied to the US Declaration of Independence which provides a set of propositions upon which governments are based, Einstein's essay on the laws of science and the laws of ethics, and basic concepts of balance and dissonance theories of attitude change. In each case, symbolic representations of the verbal language are then subjected to analysis for consistency and redundancy among the propositions and sample conclusions from each model are presented. The Muncaster's PropCalc is a valuable aid in identifying the integrity and consequences of the models. The discussion includes an examination of the relationship between the models and their correspondence with reality.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公理化方法在社会科学中的应用:《独立宣言》、爱因斯坦与伦理学、平衡与失调态度理论
公理化方法与Muncaster的procalc Workplace相结合,通过包括政治哲学、伦理推理和态度改变理论在内的应用来分析和提高社会科学理论的准确性。所有的例子最初都是通过口头陈述来表达的。一个正式的逻辑分析应用于美国独立宣言,它提供了一套命题,政府的基础,爱因斯坦的论文的科学规律和道德规律,以及平衡和不和谐的态度变化理论的基本概念。在每种情况下,口头语言的符号表示然后受到一致性和冗余命题之间的分析和样本结论从每个模型被提出。Muncaster’s procalc在识别模型的完整性和结果方面是一个有价值的辅助工具。讨论包括检查模型之间的关系及其与现实的对应关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
CAPITAL MANAGEMENT IN ISLAMIC ECONOMY Dynamics of Deflationary Pressure in China: Causes, Consequences, and Policy Implications MENYELAMI LEBIH DALAM SAMUDERA TASAWUF ISLAM SURAT YASIN PEMBERDAYAAN PETANI SACHA INCHI SECARA SWADAYA DI DESA PENGGUNG KECAMATAN NAWANGAN KABUPATEN PACITAN JAWA TIMUR
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1