Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: A consideration of Bacon's critique of the rationalism of classical thought.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Francis Bacon helped give rise to modern science, hoping it would overcome the “necessities and miseries of humanity.” Yet he recognized that even as such knowledge could improve the human condition by giving mankind mastery over nature, it could also be used to dominate and destroy humanity. In several major works Bacon repeatedly claims that the answer to this challenge would be found in the encouragement and practice of “Christian charity.” However, a close reading of the New Atlantis questions the sincerity of this claim. In this novella—a picture of Bacon’s scientific utopia—traditional Christian charity is replaced by a more secular concept of compassion that allows for and relies on inhumane means to promotes humane ends. Uncovering this more realistic but disguisedly unsettling solution for managing the wonder and terror of modern science underscores Bacon’s extraordinary prescience, sheds fresh light on an important debate in the secondary literature on Bacon, and provides some sobering insights for contemporary thinkers and leaders concerned with securing a humane social order in the face of modernity’s ever-increasing “success” in understanding and controlling the natural world.

Publication Type: Proceeding
Abstract: Francis Bacon�s reputation as the progenitor of modern science is well known, if not highly respected. His linkage of knowledge and power in The New Organon has been misinterpreted by many highly respected critics of the Enlightenment, including Adorno, Horkheimer, and Foucault. Bacon argued that in the outset of the 17th century, knowledge of the natural world was as nearly non-existent as its usefulness was undervalued. His argument was inextricably linked with his overarching ethic, questioning established authority and benefiting humankind. Overcoming humans� underestimation of their capacity to develop and carry out natural philosophy on a new footing and with a new method is a significant component to Bacon�s linkage of power and knowledge. Knowledge and power are not one and the same for Bacon, but they are linked in the sense that human power is needed to increase the store of human knowledge, and not in the sense that natural knowledge leads directly to the power to dominate nature or mankind. As Bacon emphasized, mankind is the servant of nature, not its master. By contrast, Michel Foucault and several of his philosophical descendants have taken Bacon�s words as signifying a justification for a trend of domination they see as characteristic of the Enlightenment. Science, the elder child of the Enlightenment, has, according to them, become a means of control and domination, insidiously fulfilling Bacon�s original linkage of �human knowledge� and �human power�. Foucault takes up Bacon�s theme of power and knowledge but twists it in meaning until it is virtually unrecognizable from Bacon�s original intent. It is significant that nowhere in Bacon�s corpus exists the statement �knowledge is power.� Instead, �human power� is that which enables us to discover and obey the laws of nature and which will lead to humanity�s emancipation from �mysterious� natural forces. By contrast, Foucault�s statement equating knowledge and power refers to the power to create hegemonies of knowledge by which others are commanded, just as those with power create and dictate the parameters by which knowledge attains its status. This essay not only explores these critiques of Bacon, but seeks to emancipate Francis Bacon in particular and Enlightenment thought in general from its numerous detractors. The ethic behind science as an activity fully influenced the notion that political resistance is a legitimate act, and one that we today take for granted.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Little quantitative analysis has focused on the link between globalization and respect for economic and social rights. This is particularly odd for two reasons: (1) economic and social rights are a prevalent issue for a vast portion of the world population� as they are living without these rights; and (2) the bulk of the literature addressing the relationship between globalization and physical integrity rights posits that one causal path which defines this relationship is through the intervening effect of economic and social rights. Utilizing a dataset which includes all non-OECD countries between the years of 1981 and 2004, I test both the direct relationship between globalization and respect for economic and social rights, as well as the assumed indirect relationship posited in physical integrity rights research. Contrary to current research, I find that the relationship between globalization and respect for economic and social rights is extremely complex. While the most popular measure of globalization, foreign direct investment, is not significantly related to respect for economic and social rights another indicator, portfolio investment, is; specifically portfolio investment decreases respect for economic and social rights. Additionally, though official development assistance is not significant, foreign debt is positively related to respect for economic and social rights. Consistent with previous work, I conclude that it is essential to disaggregate the concept of globalization to truly understand its effects. Additionally, the assumed indirect relationship present in work which uses FDI as a sole measure of globalization is called into question.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Since the 1960s, the U.S. economy has undergone significant transformations that have been well documented. A defining change in the workforce has been increasing female labor force participation, which in turn, has had myriad impacts on American families, including on the divisions of household labor. Studies of changes in the work force and in the household division of labor have contributed to our understanding of how entrenched gender inequalities have experienced important declines. However, these studies have not fully investigated how occupational status affects housework. Using NSFH data, we find that married couples� household chore hours vary by their occupational status. Professional couples spend significantly fewer hours on household chores, as compared to nonprofessional couples.