Suchergebnisse

Michael Oakeshott (1901-1990) achieved arguably the most sophisticated philosophical understanding of politics in recent times. His characteristic skepticism extended to the possibility of creating a genuine science of politics. This chapter sketches the development of his conception of political understanding. It begins with his early elaboration of the modal character of all knowledge, discusses his criticism of rationalism & reflections on the appropriate curriculum for studying politics in a university. It concludes by examining the theoretical basis of his rejection of the idea that politics could be analyzed as a field governed by natural laws. 23 References. Adapted from the source document.

This comprehensive reference examines the history and importance of youth participation in politics, suggests reasons for their disengagement, and discusses efforts to increase the interest of young voters in the political process--a process in which they could be a controlling factor.

The bad news is that critics of the quantitative movement in policy and political science are right (so far). Widely accepted quantitative models of politics promote cynicism and counter‐productive uses of government power. Mainstream social science provides a perverse basis for policy analysis. The good news is that there is no sound scientific reason for the schism between so called "empirical" and "normative" theories of politics. Traditional theories of politics, which show how government power can be used to serve the public interest, can be quantified and tested as empirical theory. The resulting scientific normative theory provides a constructive foundation for policy analysis.