In 1976, five years after his death, serious charges were leveled against the distinguished British scientist Sir Cyril Burt. His research on the nature of intelligence was challenged as fraudulent by a number of respected commentators, among them Leon Kamin, Oliver Gillie, Ann and Alan Clarke, and Leslie Hearnshaw. The evidence they marshaled, and the charges themselves are examined here in scrupulous detail. Written as a straightforward defense of Burt, this volume also tells a second story: the intrusion of the mass media into science, the power of the new media, and the success of this invasion, which threatens to replace intellectual authority.Convinced that a great injustice had been done, Fletcher examines each of the charges in detail, subjecting each of Burt's detractors to a symbolic cross-examination. He exposes carelessness and errors of interpretation, and reveals areas of evidence the critics failed to take into account. Each interrogation ends with a list of questions that call for clear public answer. Fletcher's closing argument calls for the restoration of Burt's reputation, so that justice is done.The broader significance of this case study goes far beyond the Burt controversy itself, and has implications for the conduct of science in an increasingly contentious social environment. Fletcher describes how ideology, in alliance with a receptive popular journalism and the media, is able to establish itself as a powerful third force in scientific discourse. The Burt Affair demonstrates what happens when the media establish a viewpoint that permeates not only the scientific community, but also entrenches that perspective so thoroughly in public understanding that its assumptions are not even questioned.

From its very beginnings Western scholarly writing on Soviet science has been largely contextual in orientation, with particular attention given to the institutional and political setting of science in Russian and Soviet history. This book moves that tradition in a new direction by focusing more closely on the social conditions of the research proc

The 2008 financial crisis revitalised the question of whether capitalism was working and how it might be overturned. More recently, the growth of new social movements across the globe are posing a threat to the economic and political status quo, with Marxist ideas rejuvenated for the 21st century. In this provocative and critically engaged introduction, Ronaldo Munck applies Marx's theories to the most pressing issues of our times: the environmental crisis, austerity, international development, religion, nationhood, the role of women and LGBTQ+ communities. Crucially, he shows the far-reaching contribution Marx can make to both contemporary debate and political action. Accessible and wide-ranging, Marx 2020 is essential reading for anyone interested in the state of the modern world and the ideas needed for effective change.

'The authority of the contributors, the quality of production, and the bibliographic notes are first-rate. It is essential for basic earth science collections, and for any college library that supports geography or geology.'

The language theory of Mikhail Bakhtin does not fall neatly under any single rubric - 'dialogism,' 'marxism,' 'prosaics,' 'authorship' - because the philosophic foundation of his writing rests ambivalently between phenomenology and Marxism. The theoretical tension of these positions creates philosophical impasses in Bakhtin's work, which have been neglected or ignored partly because these impasses are themselves mirrored by the problems of antifoundationalist and materialist tendencies in literary scholarship. In Mikhail Bakhtin: Between Phenomenology and Marxism Michael Bernard-Donals examines various incarnations of phenomenological and materialist theory - including the work of Jauss, Fish, Rorty, Althusser, and Pecheux - and places them beside Bakhtin's work, providing a contextualised study of Bakhtin, a critique of the problems of contemporary critics, and an original contribution to literary theory.

In theological discourse, argues Hugh Nicholson, the political goes "all the way down." One never reaches a bedrock level of politically neutral religious facts, because all theological discourse - even the most sublime, edifying, and "spiritual"--is shot through with polemical elements. Liberal theologies, from the Christian fulfillment theology of the nineteenth century to the pluralist theology of the twentieth, have assumed that religious writings attain spiritual truth and sublimity despite any polemical elements they might contain. Through his analysis and comparison of the Christian mystical theologian Meister Eckhart and his Hindu counterpart ÍaSkara, Nicholson arrives at a very different conclusion. Polemical elements may in fact constitute the creative source of the expressive power of religious discourses. Wayne Proudfoot has argued that mystical discourses embody a set of rules that repel any determinate understanding of the ineffable object or experience they purport to describe. In Comparative Theology and the Problem of Religious Rivalry, Nicholson suggests that this principle of negation is connected, perhaps through a process of abstraction and sublimation, with the need to distinguish oneself from one's intra- and/or inter-religious adversaries. Nicholson proposes a new model of comparative theology that recognizes and confronts one of the most urgent cultural and political issues of our time: namely, the "return of the political" in the form of anti-secular and fundamentalist movements around the world. This model acknowledges the ineradicable nature of an oppositional dimension of religious discourse, while honoring and even advancing the liberal project of curtailing intolerance and prejudice in the sphere of religion.

An extended historical and philosophical argument, this book will be a valuable text for all students of the philosophy of the social sciences. It discusses the serious alternatives to positivist and empiricist accounts of the physical sciences, and poses the debate between naturalism and anti-naturalism in the social sciences in new terms. Recent materialist and realist philosophies of science make possible a defence of naturalism which does not make concessions to positivism and which recognizes the force of several of the anti-positivist arguments from the main anti-naturalist (neo-Kantian) tradition. The author presents a critical evaluation of empiricist and positivist theories of knowledge, and investigates some classic attempts at using them to provide the philosophical foundation for a scientific sociology. He takes the Kantian critique of empiricism as the starting point for the main anti-positivist and anti-naturalist philosophical approaches to the social studies. He goes on to investigate the inadequacy of post-Kantian arguments from Rickert, Weber, Winch and others, both against non-positivist forms of naturalism and as the possible source of a distinctive philosophical foundation for the social studies. The book concludes with a critical investigation of the Marxian tradition and an attempt to establish the possibility of a materialist and realist defence of the project of a natural science of history, which escapes the fundamental flaws of both positivist and neo-Kantian attempts at philosophical foundation.