Search

Families, as fundamental units of society, represent the primary social context in which individuals spend the majority of their lives. The objectives of parenthood generally include the aim to nurture healthy and contented children. However, the birth of a child with health issues often necessitates a reevaluation of these objectives. Such circumstances directly impact the standards of living and daily routines of many parents. Numerous scientific studies have explored the ramifications of these effects. This study aims to investigate the barriers that impede the participation of families with children with special needs in recreational activities. A total of 555 parents from Mersin Province were recruited using a purposive sampling method. The study utilized the Scale of Participation Barriers to the Use of Recreation Area, developed by Gümüş and Alay, along with an Information Request Form as the primary data collection tools. In addition to descriptive statistics, the study employed the t-test for comparing the averages of two independent groups with a normal distribution, and one-way variance analysis for analyzing three or more groups. The results of the analysis revealed that the most significant barriers to participation in recreational areas were related to the 'sports area barrier' (4.01), 'individual barrier' (3.34), and 'time barrier' (2.89). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Academic Social Resources is the property of Journal of Academic Social Resources and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In contemporary philosophy of mind, naturalist theory is dominant in areas where there are attempts to explain what a human being is. Naturalism is roughly the idea that reality contains no supernatural element. In the field of the mind-body problem, this idea often stands out in a reductionist manner. When the mind is wanted to be reduced to the body, sometimes the naturalistic explanation of mental phenomena such as qualia, intentionality, free will, and language does not seem sufficient. Therefore, there are cases where the explanatory power of naturalism on mental phenomena is weak. This article aims to explain Chomsky’s critique of naturalism and at the same time the construction of his own naturalism, who realizes that the explanatory power of naturalism is weak. In this direction firstly, naturalism and its problems are tried to be explained. Then, the ground of Chomsky’s criticism of naturalism is mentioned. Methodological naturalism, which is Chomsky’s alternative naturalism, which is the naturalist understanding produced by the ground in question, is included. Chomsky provided supporting data to methodological naturalism through the philosophy of science. In this context, Chomsky’s criticisms of situations where the ideal of inter-scientific unity turns into an ideology of scientism are mentioned. Chomsky, with examples from the history of science, mentions that some phenomena that are outside the scope of science may enter the limits of science over time. While defending the obedience to the rules and method set by science, he also develops a theory of naturalism by criticizing the limits of science. Chomsky explains methodological naturalism through his views on linguistics. For this reason, the meaning of Chomskyan linguistic views in methodological naturalism are clarified in this study. As a result, it is possible to say that Chomskyan understanding of science and language theory both approve and criticize naturalism, producing a moderate, acceptable form of naturalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of the Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences is the property of Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Social Policy Studies / Sosyal Politika Çalismalari Dergisi is the property of Journal of Social Policy Studies / Sosyal Politika Calismalari Dergisi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)