Weber exposes some hard truths about the academic scientific existence and the reflections it has on our lives. He talks about universities favoring professors who can draw crowds, the unfortunate tendency toward mediocrity among the academic aristocracy, and the need to promote luck. He talks about the increasing specialization of science and how discoveries made today are doomed to become obsolete. He uses Plato's analogy of chained men facing a wall with a light - the sun of scientific truth - behind them. It is the philosopher who frees himself and shows others this light and the struggle for true being. However, if scientific truth is constantly being overlaid by new truths as old ones become obsolete (or out of fashion), what are we to believe as the final truth? Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay He says that it is considered necessary to put on blinders to specialize and that this is detrimental to science as a whole. Instead, he encourages scientists to have passion in their work, whatever it may be, because nothing is worth anything to a man, like a man if he can't do it with passion. He speaks with disgust of those who believe that science is all intellect and no soul and shows the parallel between art and mathematics and how inspiration fosters both equally - through long hours of work and sometimes not even. It makes a correlation between the progress of civilization and scientific discoveries and the continuous flow of discoveries (due to the obsolescence of previous ideas) being essential for development. However, he sees that this very progress leads to the death of magic and the intellectualization of our perception of the world. Weber goes on to say that this lack of mystery makes us less likely to be satisfied or take pleasure in our lives. We can also see this theme in Civilization and Its Discontents where Freud asks, with all these things (technology, etc.), why are we still unhappy. When Weber starts discussing politics as a science, that's where I find a relevant point. Professors must keep personal politics outside of political science, offering each alternative model with its own merits and drawbacks. He points out that in lectures, it is too easy for the teacher to impose his point of view on the class because there is no discussion, no questioning allowed. Personal politics must be practiced in the party room. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Weber describes only briefly how the study of politics as a science can be useful, that is, using an empirical method to deduce the best models from all options. However, I think the most useful aspect of studying political science is learning the art of reading and the ability to gather the thoughts and motivations of the author in what is written. Political science is also the art of asking questions and arguing, but not only for the purposes of persuasion and manipulation – for the benefit of society as a whole. Weber states that the goal of the scientist is to work in the hope that others will go further than us. By studying philosophy and politics, being that person who turns those who are in chains to see the light, we help the progress of society.