Annotated Bibliography

1. Hossain, F. (2014) A Critical Analysis of Empiricism. Open Journal of Philosophy, 4,

225-230. doi: 10.4236/ojpp.2014.43030.

Hossain, the author of this journal, argued that the traditional sense of empiricism

could not meet the demand of enquiries in the fields of epistemology and the

metaphysics. The author used theories by empiricists such as Locke and Hume in

adjacent with other theories from critics and supporters of empiricism such as Kant and

Passmore in order to find the flaws within traditional and modern empiricist theories.

With thorough analyses of such theories, the author concluded that empiricism could not

be completely accepted because the theory could not provide any certainty of scientific

knowledge in the sense that it denies the existence of objective reality, and ignores the

dialectic relationship of the subjective and objective contents of knowledge. This journal

is different compared to other entries in this bibliography because it does not apply the

theory of empiricism to other media, but instead it used its own theories to criticize itself.

2. Spiegel, G. M. (2019). The Limits of Empiricism: The Utility of Theory in Historical

Thought and Writing. The Medieval History Journal, 22(1), 1–22.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0971945818806989.

Through this journal, Spiegel investigates about the recent increase in efforts for

integrating the practice of the theory of empiricism and the “epistemic virtues of

accuracy, impartiality, objectivity, fairness, attentiveness, perseverance and the like that

is considered as the professional standard that guarantees a historian’s credibility. In

other words, this journal investigates the effort to generate a synthetic approach to

historiography in which elements of narrativism and empiricism are equally in play and

continually modify one another in the production of historiographical representation and

 meaning. Using theories from philosophers and schoolars of olden and recent years,

Spiegel concluded that we have no need to choose between hermeneutics (the ‘linguistic

turn’) and empiricism or textuality and historical materialism. Instead, we should create a

place and a plea for a new historical ethics for a historiographical posture that seeks to

combine theory and empiricism.

3. Nicholson. (2020). A Singular Experiment: Frankenstein's Creature and the Nature of

Scientific Community. Science Fiction Studies, 47(1), 1.
doi:10.5621/sciefictstud.47.1.0001

This journal discussed about the relationship between empiricism and the nature

of scientific community in Shelley’s Frankenstein fiction as an ethical critique on a

person’s intellectual exceptionalism. The author used Goldstein’s theory of empiricism to

criticize Shelley’s Frankenstein and use the result of the criticism to criticize the nature of

scientific community’s ethic and attitude. The author concluded that Frankenstein’s

experience as a newborn creation shaped Frankenstein to become an anti-thesis for

Victor’s unnatural laboratory work, where in the end, the fiction showed an idealistic

future of responsible scientific research and community. Compared to other entries in this

bibliography, this journal used the theory of empiricism to criticize a work of literature

and the condition of a certain scientific community.

4. Hesiod. (2019, August 27). The Philosophy of the Epic of Gilgamesh, 1: Gilgamesh and
the Hegelian "Hero". Retrieved June 10, 2020, from
https://minervawisdom.com/2019/02/12/the-philosophy-of-the-epic-of-gilgamesh-1-
gilgamesh-and-the-hegelian-hero/

Hesiod. (2019, February 13). The Philosophy of the Epic of Gilgamesh, 2: Enkidu and
the Cult of Sex and Civilization. Retrieved June 10, 2020, from
https://minervawisdom.com/2019/02/13/the-philosophy-of-the-epic-of-gilgamesh-2-
enkidu-and-the-cult-of-sex-and-civilization/

Hesiod. (2019, February 14). The Philosophy of the Epic of Gilgamesh, 3: The Conquest
of Nature and the "Plant of Life". Retrieved June 10, 2020, from
https://minervawisdom.com/2019/02/14/the-philosophy-of-the-epic-of-gilgamesh-3-the-
conquest-of-nature-and-the-plant-of-life/

The author of this article, Hesiod, argued that everything that the central
character experienced throughout the story affect how the characters ended up by the end
of the story. Hesiod argued that Gilgamesh’s experience with his friend Enkidu and the
latter’s death, along with Gilgamesh’s journey to obtain the Plant of Life and his
subsequent failure of doing so affect Gilgamesh and shaped him to become a celebrated
Hero King praised by his people for his wisdom and strength. Aside from Gilgamesh, the
author also argued that Enkidu was also shaped by his experience after being created. His
relationship with Shamhat and sex, along with Enkidu’s eventual friendship with
Gilgamesh shaped Enkidu to become a being with free will and agency. Not to mention
his death that affect Gilgamesh so much that he become more aware of his own mortality.
The author concluded that every character, at the end of the story, is affected by their
journey throughout and was shaped accordingly based on the outcome of the journey.