Andreski on Thinking

Stanislav Andreski in Social Sciences as Sorcery (1972)


So long as authority inspires awe, confusion and absurdity enhance conservative tendencies in society. Firstly, because clear and logical thinking leads to a cumulation of knowledge (of which the progress of the natural sciences provides the best example) and the advance of knowledge sooner or later undermines the traditional order. Confused thinking, on the other hand, leads nowhere in particular and can be indulged indefinitely without producing any impact upon the world.

Author: Atanu Dey

Economist.

3 thoughts on “Andreski on Thinking”

  1. (A propos of social science as sorcery.)

    According to Popper and other thinkers in his vein, psychoanalysis (Freud, Adler, Jung, etc.) is pseudoscience, and does not properly belong to pyschology.

    Have you thought about this? What is your position, Atanu?

    Like

  3. The problem with Popper’s claim is that psychology isn’t just a science, any more than philosophy is. So how can he say psychoanalysis doesn’t belong to psychology and hope to be considered credible? Any study of the human psyche has to be considered above and meyond mere physical measurement, which is all science is capable of and indeed all its aspires to do. Science just doesn’t want to admit that it’s only one way – and a limited one at that – of explaining the complex reality we live.

    Like

Comments are closed.