Suchergebnisse

This essay portrays the capacities of political science in Western as well as in Central and Eastern Europe. The discussion is divided into four subtopics: (1) the political and social context in which European political science developed after World War II, (2) its degree of institutionalisation as an academic discipline, (3) its professional organisation and communication structure, and (4) its capacity to represent the discipline's education and research interests in the European area. The analysis concludes with a plea to create a database which, in a comprehensive way, allows for a comparative self-description of the discipline in the European area of higher education and research. Adapted from the source document.

Under the impact of B. de Jouvenel & the Futuribles group, attention is focusing lately on conjecture as a major task of pol'al sci. Actually, without scholars being fully aware of it, the discipline was always preoccupied with prognostication. Exact prediction is impossible in view of the numerous variables which affect pol'al developments & many of which lie outside the scope of the pol'al sci'st's expertness. But conjectures based on is of an 'if-then' type, of a degree of reliability approaching that of conjectures offered by other soc sci's (demography, econ's, law) can be achieved if sufficient attention is paid to the methodological requirements involved. This goal is nearing achievement in public admin, but the record is far less satisfactory in gov & is worse still in internat'l relations & in pol'al theory. The principal methods for assembling & analyzing data are set out with a view to formulating valid r's. A list of topics concerning which such is might be established is suggested, & it is recommended that studies to that effect would gain if pursued by inter-disciplinary & internat'l teams. IPSA.

"The basis of the following little work was a lecture delivered in . the Young Men's Christian Association." ; Mode of access: Internet.

THE AUTHOR PRESENTS A SUMMARY OF THE WHOLE PROCESS OF USING MODELS IN POLITICAL SCIENCE TO INTRODUCE THE CONCEPT, THE HISTORY, TECHNIQUES, AND TYPES TO THE BEGINNER IN THE FIELD.

This group of essays came out of an attempt to address the "usually unasked," "bound to embarrass" question that Eric Monkkonen raised in his 1994 presidential address to the Social Science History Association. As both the social sciences and history have been reshaped in recent years by intellectual tendencies variously labeled "postmodernism," "poststructuralism," or the "linguistic turn," the never especially clear relationship between the social sciences and history has grown even more muddy. The essays that follow are drawn from two sessions of the 1998 annual program of the Social Science History Association. The sessions brought together scholars from a variety of disciplines and cohorts who held divergent ideas about the links between social science and history and different substantive agendas for explaining historical change. A mix of essays that highlight new methodologies for analyzing the past and pieces that offer explanations or remedies, the articles printed here point to some of the central issues in the debate about what social science history might mean today.