Search results

Data in the Natural and Exact Sciences and in the Social Sciences: A Comparative Study

Characterizing various approaches according to "elective affinities" shared in practice, considered is how historical institutionalism defines research agendas & develops explanations. Substantive agendas, temporal arguments (historical process), & attention to context & configuration characterize historical institutionalism; these aspects are detailed to identify distinctive core strategies & discern the advantages & limits of the approach relative to others employed in empirical political science. In conclusion, broad issues of empirical research method & strategies of knowledge cumulation are addressed. J. Zendejas

Abstract.Political scientists are increasingly studying public policy in interdisciplinary environments where they are challenged by the political and normative agenda of other disciplines. Political science has unique perspectives to offer, including a stress on the political feasibility of policy in an environment of power differentials. Our contributions should be informed by the insights of cognitive psychology and we should focus on improving governance, in particular the competence and integrity of decision makers. The discipline's stress on legitimacy and acceptability provides a normative anchor, but we should not over invest in the idea that incentives will achieve normative goals. Creating decision situations that overcome cognitive deficiencies is ultimately the most important strategy.Résumé.Les politologues étudient les politiques publiques dans des contextes de plus en plus interdisciplinaires, où ils sont remis en question par les préoccupations politique et normatives d'autres disciplines. La science politique a des perspectives uniques à offrir, y compris un accent sur la faisabilité politique des politiques publiques dans un contexte de relations de pouvoir asymétriques. Nos contributions doivent être informées par les idées associées à la psychologie cognitive et nous devrions nous concentrer sur l'amélioration de la gouvernance, et notamment la compétence et l'intégrité des décideurs. L'accent de notre discipline sur la légitimité et l'acceptabilité fournit un point d'ancrage normatif, mais il ne faut pas trop investir dans l'idée que des mesures incitatives permettront nécessairement d'atteindre des objectifs normatifs. Créer des situations de décision qui surmontent les lacunes cognitives des acteurs est finalement la stratégie la plus importante à adopter.

IN THIS ARTICLE, JOHN DRYZEK AND STEPHEN LEONARD DEFEND THEIR EARLIER ESSAY EMPHASIZING THE NEED FOR CONTEXT-SENSITIVE HISTORIES OF THE DISCIPLINE OF POLITICAL SCIENCE. IN THEIR VIEW, DISCIPLINARY HISTORY MUST GUIDE PRACTICAL INQUIRY IF IT IS TO BE MOST USEFUL. JAMES FARR, JOHN GUNNELL, AND RAYMOND SEIDELMAN CRITIQUE THE ARGUMENT PRESENTED BY DRYZEK AND LEONARD.

"Harold D. Lasswell is arguably the quintessential face of political science to the larger public of the past century. However, there is a side to Lasswell less well known, but of special importance in this day and age: the place of the profession of politics as an academic activity. This book, written at the start of the culture wars thirty years ago, outlines the basic core position of political science practitioners. It helps to explain why the field kept its collective cool, when other social science professionals veered to more extreme activist positions.The Future of Political Science grew out of the phenomenally rapid expansion of the study of government in the United States and elsewhere. The study of professionalism among physical scientists, lawyers, engineers, etc. was not matched by such internal examination within the social sciences until much later. Lasswell's overview centered on developments in the United States. There unfettered study of government reached unprecedented heights in the final stage of the twentieth century. The key concept of this volume, one that continues to inform discourse, is the relationship of political science as a mechanism for the study and teaching of the political system to the field as a tool of the Establishment. This concern grew in the wake of a variety of scandals and secret support sponsored by both government and non-government organizations alike.The Future of Political Science covers areas ranging from membership size and disparities, intervention scenarios in world events, the nature of creativity in political research collaboration in projects with the other social sciences, and the location of scientific centers of gravity in the study of politics. Because of Lasswell's works we have a field of the political science of knowledge as well as the sociology of knowledge.Harold D. Lasswell served as Ford Foundation Professor of the Social Sciences at Yale University, Distinguished Professor of Policy Sciences at Joh"--Provided by publisher.

Why major in political science? This is a question students often ask. Under the pressure of vocationalism, students in the liberal arts are increasingly searching for connections between their undergraduate major and the world of work. This is a concern not only of students, but necessarily of faculty and institutional planners. Anxiety about enrollment shifts from the liberal arts to vocational training has inspired foundation-funded programs to assess strategies for relating traditional learning to career preparation. At a recent major conference on the humanities and careers in business, corporate and academic leaders urged colleges and universities to pursue excellence in the humanities "without distortion and without faddish 'relevance' to business." At the same time, the need to assist students with career planning of a more comprehensive nature than mere job placement was acknowledged.