Search results

Nobody concerned with political economy can neglect the history of economic doctrines. Structural changes in the economy and society influence economic thinking and, conversely, innovative thought structures and attitudes have almost always forced economic institutions and modes of behaviour to adjust. We learn from the history of economic doctrines how a particular theory emerged and whether, and in which environment, it could take root. We can see how a school evolves out of a common methodological perception and similar techniques of analysis, and how it has to establish itself. The interaction between unresolved problems on the one hand, and the search for better solutions or explanations on the other, leads to a change in paradigma and to the formation of new lines of reasoning. As long as the real world is subject to progress and change scientific search for explanation must out of necessity continue.

Here Marx's philosophy is dissected from the angle of bourgeois capitalism which he, Marx, sought to overcome. His social, political and economic ideas are criticised. Although it is noted that Marx wanted to ameliorate human suffering, the result turned out to be Utopian, contrary to his own intentions. Contrary to Marx, it is individualism that makes the best sense and capitalism that holds out the best hope for coping with most of the problems he sought to solve. Marx's philosophy is alluring but flawed at a very basic level, namely, where it denies the individuality of each person and treats humanity as “an organic body”. Capitalism, while by no means out to guarantee a perfect society, is the best setting for the realisation of the diverse but often equally noble human goals of its membership.

“Communism has never concealed the fact that it rejects all absolute concepts of morality. It scoffs at any consideration of “good” and “evil” as indisputable categories. Communism considers morality to be relative, to be a class matter… It has infected the whole world with the belief in the relativity of good and evil.” Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, Warning to the West, 1975.

Museum visits provide opportunities for students to learn content in engaging and interactive ways. In social studies, museums may be spaces where students can increase their historical and civic understanding through exposure to artifacts and narratives unavailable in classrooms. Yet, research suggests teachers are insufficiently prepared to integrate museum visits into classroom curriculum effectively. In this project, the instructors of the two secondary social studies methods course sections organized a visit to a natural history museum. The instructors modeled pre- and post-visit lesson activities during class and provided a guide for pre-service teachers to complete during their museum visit. While pre-service teachers reported they better understood the importance of connecting museum visits to classroom curriculum, they also raised questions about how methods course faculty might introduce pre-service teachers to museum visits. This article discusses what was learned during the project, as well as approaches social studies methods course instructors might reflect upon when considering museum visits as a component of social studies teacher education.

This chapter offers a review of Amy Allen’s The End of Progress: Decolonizing the Normative Foundations of Critical Theory (2016) and presents the book as having both a negative and positive aim. Its negative aim is to offer a critique of the Eurocentric narratives of historical progress that serves the function of normative grounding in the critical theories of Jürgen Habermas and Axel Honneth. Its positive aim is to provide a new approach to the normative grounding of critical theory that eschews Eurocentric narratives of progress through the idea of metanormative contextualism. For Allen, metanormative contextualism is developed through an engagement with the works of Adorno and Foucault. This chapter raises some critical questions concerning the position of metanormative contextualism, arguing that there are significant differences between Adorno and Foucault that render the position unstable. Specifically, Adorno’s normative conception of truth, alongside his critical naturalism presented through the notion of natural history, makes him ill-suited as a representative of Allen’s metanormative contextualism and complicates the contributions of Foucault’s genealogical analyses. The chapter concludes that a careful consideration of Adorno’s views reveals him to be opposed to the two central tenets of metanormative contextualism as defined by Allen.

The purpose of the paper is to showcase the significant achievements of Egypt's scientists in the 20th century across various fields of study such as medicine, physics, chemistry, biology, math, geology, astronomy and engineering. The paper highlights the struggles and successes of these scientists, as well as the cultural, social and political factors that influenced their lives and work. The aim is to inspire young people to pursue careers in science and make their own contributions to society by presenting these scientists as role models for hard work and dedication. Ultimately, the paper seeks to promote the importance of science and its impact on society.

The purpose of this review is to present the scientific biographies of Egypt's most distinguished scientists, primarily in the field of Natural Sciences, in a balanced and comprehensive manner. The work is objective, honest and abstract, avoiding any bias or exaggeration. The author provides a clear and concise methodology, including a brief introduction to the scientist and their field of study, an explanation of their major contributions, the impact of their work on society, any challenges or obstacles faced during their career and their lasting legacy. The aim is to showcase the important achievements of these scientists, their impact on their respective fields and to inspire future generations to pursue scientific careers.

The group of outstanding scientists in 20th century Egypt were shaped by various factors, including familial upbringing, education, society, political and cultural atmosphere and state support for scientific research. These scientists made significant contributions to various academic disciplines, including medicine, physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics and engineering. Their impact on their communities and cultures has received international acclaim, making them role models for future generations of scientists and researchers. The history of these scientists highlights the importance of educational investments and supporting scientific research to foster innovation and social progress. The encyclopedia serves as a useful tool for students, instructors and education professionals, preserving Egypt's scientific heritage and honouring the scientists' outstanding accomplishments.

The encyclopedia preserves Egypt's scientific heritage, which has been overlooked for political or other reasons. It is a useful tool for a variety of readers, including students, instructors and education professionals, and it offers insights into universally relevant scientific success factors as well as scientific research methodologies. The encyclopedia honours the outstanding scientific accomplishments of Egyptian researchers and their contributions to the world's scientific community.

The practical implications of this paper are several. First, it highlights the importance of education, family upbringing and societal support for scientific research in fostering innovation and social progress. Second, it underscores the need for continued funding and support for scientific research to maintain and build upon the accomplishments of past generations of scientists. Third, it encourages young people to pursue scientific careers and make their own contributions to society. Fourth, it preserves the scientific heritage of Egypt and honors the contributions of its outstanding scientists. Finally, it serves as a useful tool for students, instructors and education professionals seeking to understand the factors underlying scientific success and research methodologies.

The social implications of the paper include promoting national pride and cultural identity, raising awareness of the importance of education and scientific research in driving social progress, inspiring future generations of scientists and researchers, reducing socioeconomic disparities and emphasizing the role of society, politics and culture in shaping scientific researchers' personalities and interests.

The paper's originality/value lies in its comprehensive documentation of the scientific biographies of Egypt's most prominent scientists in the 20th century, providing unique insights into the factors that contributed to their development and their impact across various academic disciplines. It preserves Egypt's scientific heritage and inspires future generations of scientists and researchers through the promotion of educational investments and scientific research. The encyclopedia serves as a useful tool for education professionals seeking to understand scientific success factors and research methodologies, emphasizing the importance of supportive and inclusive environments for scientific development.

No longer do resource economists merely regard nature as a collection of inert materials to be improved by human labor and manufactured capital; rather, nature is, to an increasing extent, taken to be a mindless producer of economically valuable ecosystem goods and services. Instances of natural capital are frequently said to produce such goods and services in a manner that is relatively detached from human agency. This article argues that, historically, the idea of nature as a systematic original producer capable of self-generation is hardly novel. The eighteenth-century roots of this idea can be found in the writings of Carl Linnaeus who depicted the whole Earth and all of its productions as the “oeconomy of nature.”

Marx is widely regarded today as an “evolutionary” economist. However, what is clear from a close examination of the writings of both Marx and Engels is that they did not actually take Darwin′s theory of natural selection on board. Consequently, if their theory of socio‐economic change is evolutionary, it is not so in a Darwinian sense. Considers the different sense in which the economics of Marx can be regarded as “evolutionary” and the distance between Darwinian and Marxian conceptions of natural or social change.