ics and formal logic). All other claims to knowledge
that could not be traced to sense experience and that
were not a claim of reason were, in Hume’s word,
“sophistry.” Logical positivists set about defining the
connection between sense data and propositions in
strictly logical terms, and likewise defining the distinc-
tion between science and nonscience. This, they
argued, was the only area in which philosophy had a
genuine role. Naturally, within this schema, questions
of morality and social justice could not be asked
except in reductive terms. A. J. Ayer, for example,
argued that moral language was merely the expression
of emotions and not, properly speaking, propositional.
Positivism in its many forms has been widely criti-
cized. Although it allies itself with the indubitable suc-
cess of the natural sciences, its own claims about the
nature of knowledge and society have been less per-
suasive.
The idea that human behavior and society can be
explained in a reductive manner by employing the
methods of the sciences (proceeding from sense expe-
riences) has been systematically questioned. It has
been argued that human behavior, originating in, for
example, intentions and attitudes, cannot be captured
by a description based on empirical data. In brief, the
idea is that human actions are different in kind from
physical events and so require a radically different
method of investigation. In addition, the reduction
and elimination of the normative dimension of hu-
man society, its morality and justice, leaves the cru-
cial elements of society unexplained. Taken together,
these criticisms deny the positivist’s claim that there
is a single scientific methodology based on empiri-
cal data.
Further criticism has been directed at the claim
made by logical positivists that meaningful proposi-
tions can be distinguished from nonmeaningful propo-
sitions by a determination of their empirical or logical
content. Work by contemporary philosophers such as
W.V.O. Quine and Donald Davidson has undermined
the possibility of making such determinations and has
therefore called into question the central themes of the
positivist’s project.
The label positivismhas also come to represent any
theory that diminishes the humanity and agency of
persons and that appeals to the authority of natural
science.
Despite these many criticisms, positivism repre-
sents the ambition to bring within the single explana-
tory scheme of natural science both nature and society.
The possibility that we could understand ourselves as
well as we now understand the natural world is
intriguing to some, although frightening to others.Further Readings
Ayer, A. J. Logical Positivism.New York: Free Press, 1966.
Comte, A. The Positive Philosophy of August Comte.New Y ork:
D. Appleton and Co., 1853.post-Modernism
A philosophical and political school of thought that
rejects the MODERN ENLIGHTENMENT LIBERALview of rea-
son, NATURAL RIGHTS, and order. Prominent in the late
20th century, post-Modernism is often associated with
the writings of the French academic Michel FOUCAULT
(1926–84).
Philosophically, post-Modernism declares the
assumptions of modern science (of an orderly, rational
universe, governed by LAWS that are known to
humankind) inaccurate and distortive of reality. Both
natural and social reality is irrational, unpredictable,
and chaotic. There is no objective Truth but only rela-
tive, contingent knowledge. Similar to EXISTENTIALISM,
this view encourages individual, subjective giving of
meaning to life. Politically, it leads to a RADICAL INDIVID-
UALISM (similar to LIBERTARIAN thought), moral rela-
tivism (similar to Thomas HOBBES’s ethics), and
antiauthority sentiments (such as ANARCHISM). This
nihilism and vagueness made post-Modernist political
theory less influential than other 20th-century politi-
cal philosophies. By the 21st century, it, like COMMU-
NISM, FASCISM, and existentialism, had declined in
significance.power
A central concept in political thought, power comes
from the Latin word potentia,meaning the capacity of
one person affecting or controlling another person.
This goes to the French term pouvoir,or the ability of
influencing others. CICEROdescribed political power in
the Roman Empire as residing in the people but real-
ized in the government. Other CLASSICALGreek and
CHRISTIANthinkers discuss power less and VIRTUEand
JUSTICEmore. The MODERNperiod of Western political
theory, beginning with RENAISSANCE Italian writer
MACHIAVELLI, concentrates on power more extensively.
The Prince, in Machiavellian theory, must be con-238 post-Modernism