Human Sciences

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Human Sciences by Mind Map: Human Sciences

1. Scope & Application - Candice

1.1. Scope

1.1.1. Topics

1.1.1.1. Biological, social and cultural aspects of human life

1.1.1.1.1. Evolution of humans

1.1.1.1.2. Human's behaviour

1.1.1.1.3. Molecular and population genetics

1.1.1.1.4. Population growth

1.1.1.1.5. Ageing

1.1.1.1.6. Ethnic

1.1.1.1.7. Cultural diversity

1.1.1.1.8. The human interaction with the environment

1.1.2. Subjects

1.1.2.1. Anthropology

1.1.2.2. Communication

1.1.2.3. Criminology

1.1.2.4. Cultural studies

1.1.2.5. Economics

1.1.2.6. Law

1.1.2.7. Psychology

1.1.2.8. Environment

1.1.2.9. History

1.1.2.10. Human geography

1.1.2.11. Internet

1.1.2.12. International relations

1.1.2.13. Sociology

1.1.2.14. Linguistics

1.2. Features

1.2.1. Abstract

1.2.2. Involve more thoughts and emotions

1.2.3. No correct answer

1.2.4. Various ideas

1.3. The aim of applications

1.3.1. Make predictions based on laws and models

1.3.2. Gain insight and understanding

1.3.3. Example of applying some of the applications to study a topic: The data shows we want to end inequality. Here’s how to start …

1.3.3.1. Long term investigation

1.3.3.2. Large range of samples

1.3.3.3. Questionnaires

1.3.3.4. Cross cultures investigation

1.3.3.5. Psychology and Sociology

2. Language & Concepts - Shahmeer

2.1. Leading Questions

2.1.1. Leading questions are questions that may influence the outcome of an answer.

2.1.1.1. Language isn't necessarily neutral. In the case of leading questions, one can swayed to answer a question differently depending on the prior questions asked. Watch this video for a great example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=131&v=G0ZZJXw4MTA

2.1.2. These create problems for social scientists. It makes it difficult for them to get fair and accurate data when the people they are studying may have a tendency to change their answers because of the influence of their answers prior.

2.1.2.1. A way in which this problem can be resolved is to reduce the number of leading questions asked, make them less subjective or bias, or just get rid of any leading questions. The greater the number of leading questions, the greater the tendency for the person to have a bias that was not formed by the person themselves, but with the influence of the leading questions.

2.2. Language of lying

2.2.1. Even though lying can be hard to see on a physical level, we can look at how the language of lying ties in with the subconscious.

2.2.1.1. 1.) When people lie they tend to avoid personal pronouns.

2.2.1.1.1. They want to distance themselves from the lie as subconsciously, they feel guilty about lying.

2.2.1.2. 2.) When people lie they tend to make their stories much simpler as it's difficult to construct a long, well thought out story when lying

2.2.1.3. 3.) When people lie they tend to make their lies longer and use unnecessary words to help support the lie.

2.2.1.4. 4.) When people lie they tend to use harsher and more aggressive language

2.3. Miscommunication

2.3.1. Transmission Model

2.3.1.1. Communication is a simple message and receive system. One person says something, the other receives the message and reciprocates.

2.3.2. Transactional Model

2.3.2.1. Communication is much more complicated. Emotions, reactions and feedback are all taken into account when communication is looked at. When communicating, there are a number of factors that can cause miscommunication.

2.3.2.1.1. Everyone has a different filter. Even when face to face, the way one person interprets something may be completley different to how another person interprets it. This is why some people may find that others don't think a problem is as serious as they think it is. It is also what causes arguments because of the rift in interpretation of the same message.

2.4. Language, community and culture

2.4.1. Translation can be very difficult. In different languages, different words have slight alterations that, when said in context, may change a sentence completley. These slight differences between cultures may be a root cause of violence and war. At the heart of it, language is what can heal and destroy nations.

3. Methodology - Katie

3.1. Simplified model for the knowledge production in HS

3.2. 3 Main Types of Research Methodology

3.2.1. All of these focus on finding and interpeting different types of data

3.2.1.1. Critical Theory

3.2.1.1.1. Much like the positivist approach focuses on the objectivity of facts to form a final judgement

3.2.1.1.2. Uses different parts of the brain to look for patterns and underlying meaning to data that needs to be iterated

3.2.1.1.3. 2 scientific communities have come up with meaning to what the definition of critical thinking is:

3.2.1.1.4. Used widely in many different types of humanities like psychology and philosophy but most importantly used in politics

3.2.1.1.5. Unlike the postivist approach with the final outcome focusing on differnt parts of the scientific method . The final outcome of critical thining focuses on:

3.2.1.2. Positivist Approach

3.2.1.2.1. Focuses on the scientific approach

3.2.1.2.2. Obejctive: Not biases so it doesn't focus on a persons feeling and opinions

3.2.1.2.3. Has recreable experiments to ensure that the test was accurate and the data collected was not influecned or skwted in any way

3.2.1.2.4. Because of the experiments it looks a the probability and how this influences the final outcome

3.2.1.2.5. Finally the outcome is based off of 4 key components that takes into accounts all parts of the experiment these are

3.2.1.3. Interpretivist Approach

3.2.1.3.1. This method focuses mainly on the interpretations of the data and resources collected this is done using:

3.2.1.3.2. Because of the interpestion fo the data this means that this way of collective data is very subjective and is influenced based on:

3.2.1.3.3. In order to make a final judgement and come to a conclusion it is very important to retrieve all the facts and information, this gives context to the situation

3.2.1.3.4. Compared to both positivist and critical thinking the outcome is based off:

4. Historical Development - Jong

4.1. TURNS - Paradigm shift in human sciences

4.1.1. Types of Turns

4.1.1.1. Cultural Turn

4.1.1.1.1. social sciences and humanities starting to focus on culture

4.1.1.1.2. social process where people create their own identiteis

4.1.1.1.3. way to give people meaning to their lives

4.1.1.2. Interpretive Turn

4.1.1.2.1. implications for history, memory, and storage of data

4.1.1.2.2. rehabilitates subjectivity and views data collection as a mutual construction of meaning

4.1.1.3. Narrative Turn

4.1.1.3.1. generated interest in several disciplines

4.1.1.3.2. inspired interest in narrative analysis

4.1.1.3.3. represents an epistemological shift from a scientific perspective toward a narrative paradigm which gives primacy to human experience and subjectivity

4.1.1.4. Post Modern Turn

4.1.1.4.1. broad movement that developed in the 20th century which marked a departure from modernism

4.1.1.4.2. transformation and upheaval of contemporary social and cultural theory

4.1.1.4.3. seismically active terrain in philosophy, science, and the arts

4.1.2. Applications of TURNS in real life

4.1.2.1. With knowledge

4.1.2.1.1. History and development of science

4.1.2.2. With methodology

4.1.2.2.1. role of methodology in turns

4.1.2.2.2. Does it always make a change?

4.1.2.3. With researcher

4.1.2.3.1. relationship with the researcher and their identities

4.1.2.3.2. How to deal with turns in a middle of a research

5. Personal Knowledge - Everyone

5.1. KATIE: Personal Knowledge is very subjective in the form of human sciences

5.1.1. Everyone depending on the types of biases one acquires this can influence decisions and opinions you have on personal level. Sometimes consciously but most of the time this is done in the sub-conscious making it very hard for people to shift and change their perspectives.

5.1.2. Assuming that we can be objective, there are two main types of scholars in the world.

5.1.2.1. Obejective example: Making value-free judgements where both the subjects of an investigation and the investigators do not bring their own feelings, beliefs, opinions into a study

5.1.2.2. These 2 Types Include:

5.1.2.2.1. Naturalists who believe that you can apply the methods of natural science to the study of social behaviour, and treat human subjects just as you do animals or objects in the natural world.

5.1.2.2.2. Interpretivists who believe that not only that value-free judgements in the human sciences are impossible to make, they are also undesirable.