Intro -- Contents -- Foreword -- Introduction -- One -- 1. Beginnings (1274b32- 41) -- 2. Citizens (1274b41- 1276b15) -- 3. To Be or Not to Be (1276a6- 1276b15) -- 4. To Be and to Be (1276b16- 1277b32) -- 5. Noncitizens (1277b33- 1278b5) -- Two -- 1. "The Few in Opposition" (1278b6- 1279a21) -- 2. From a Man's Point of View (1279a22- 1280a6) -- 3. Ignoble Division (1280a7- 25) -- 4. The Oligarchic Logos (1280a25- 1281a10) -- 5. Unreason Is the Reason (1281a11- 39) -- 6. The Multitude, the Demos, and Free Men (1281a39- 1282b13) -- Three -- 1. Political Philosophy (1282b14- 1284a3) -- 2. Hares and Hermaphrodites (1284a3- 1284b34) -- 3. Kings (1284b35- 1286a9) -- 4. The King of Kings (1286a7- 1286b40) -- 5. The King of the Beasts (1287a1- 1288b6) -- Appendix 1: A Note on the Translation -- Appendix 2: Translation of Aristotle's Politics, Book III -- Notes -- Bibliography -- Index
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
In 1977, Charles Lindblom concluded his study of Politics and Markets with the assertion that "the large private corporation fits oddly into democratic theory and vision. Indeed, it does not fit." In 1983, Robert Reich envisioned The Next American Frontier as the eradication of the distinction between business culture and civic culture in the United States and the full integration of the corporation into the country's key political and social processes. Failure to achieve such a new political-economic compact could mean, Reich asserted, the end of democracy's progress in America. Between Lindblom and Reich lie six short years in time and one vast gulf in political theory and policy perspective. Their positions set the framework for a whole series of political choices confronting American politics today. They also set an agenda for political science as a discipline that studies power, authority, and social change—an agenda calling for an expansion of both intellectual focus and analytical paradigms.Differences between the purposes and contents of Lindblom's and Reich's studies can be cited, of course. Politics and Markets presents itself as a scholarly work in the theory of political economy, whereas The Next American Frontier has a definite prescriptive flavor designed to influence current political debate. But such differences do not obscure the important element shared by the two books: recognition of the power and position of large corporations as the determining factor in the political-economic future of liberal democracy. Generated from this are several critical questions both authors confront: What is the purpose of public power and that of private economic power in advanced industrial societies today? What should be the relationship between the two as regards the preservation of liberal democracy? What is that relationship when the large corporation is taken into account? What redirection of corporate power is necessary or possible? What blending of corporate institutions and political institutions does liberal democracy allow—or demand?
Scientific debates in modern societies often blur the lines between the science that is being debated and the political, moral, and legal implications that come with its societal applications. This manuscript traces the origins of this phenomenon to professional norms within the scientific discipline and to the nature and complexities of modern science and offers an expanded model of science communication that takes into account the political contexts in which science communication takes place. In a second step, it explores what we know from empirical work in political communication, public opinion research, and communication research about the dynamics that determine how issues are debated and attitudes are formed in political environments. Finally, it discusses how and why it will be increasingly important for science communicators to draw from these different literatures to ensure that the voice of the scientific community is heard in the broader societal debates surrounding science.
Scientific debates in modern societies often blur the lines between the science that is being debated and the political, moral, and legal implications that come with its societal applications. This manuscript traces the origins of this phenomenon to professional norms within the scientific discipline and to the nature and complexities of modern science and offers an expanded model of science communication that takes into account the political contexts in which science communication takes place. In a second step, it explores what we know from empirical work in political communication, public opinion research, and communication research about the dynamics that determine how issues are debated and attitudes are formed in political environments. Finally, it discusses how and why it will be increasingly important for science communicators to draw from these different literatures to ensure that the voice of the scientific community is heard in the broader societal debates surrounding science.
