Suchergebnisse

PROFESSOR LAZARSFELD ONCE REFERRED TO SOCIOLOGY AS BEING IN A sense a residuary legatee, the surviving part of a very general study, out of which specializations have successively been shaped.The same might be said of political science. In the West the first deliberate and reflective studies of political life were made in Greece at the end of the th century BC, and in the succeeding century. The histories of Herodotus and Thucydides, some of the pamphlets attributed to Xenophon, above all the normative and empirical studies of Plato and Aristotle were among the direct ancestors of contemporary political science. Parallel examples are to be found in the intellectual history of China, India and Islam. It seems that at certain stages in the development of great societies questions of legitimacy, power and leadership assume supreme importance; and intense intellectual effort, using the best analytical tools available, is devoted to the study of man as brought to a focus in the study of politics.

This book deals with the role and place of the general will in modern and contemporary political thought. This project is carried out at the crossroads of the history of ideas and political philosophy. It extensively develops historical and philosophical themes, showing modifications to the idea of the general will in the writings of thinkers who sometimes represent very distant epochs. The author tracks down the birth and the development of the idea of the general will in ancient, medieval

Vols. 4-38, 40-41 include Record of political events, Oct. 1, 1888-Dec. 31, 1925 (issued as a separately paged supplement to no. 3 of v. 31-38 and to no. 1 of v. 40) ; Microfilm. ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Issued by the Academy of Political Science in the City of New York, 1909- ; by the Academy of Political Science, Edited by the Faculty of Political Science of Columbia University ; Vols. 1-15, 1886-1900. 1 v; Vols. 1-30, 1886-1915. 1 v.; Vols. 1-45, 1886-1930. 1 v.; Vols. 46-65, 1931-50. 1 v ; NEWS; MICROFILM 21252: See call no. H1 P8 for MAIN holdings on paper for this title. ; MAIN; AQ P66: Includes reprint editions when original not available ; SCP weekly serials 2007/2008. ; UPD

A central problem in political inquiry is the conceptual and linguistic informality of political science. For most of its history, the discipline has been largely pursued with the analytic and logical machinery of ordinary language. Likewise, there has been little effort to standardize how language is used, or to systematize theoretical procedures to insure methodological uniformity. In an effort to better understand and defend the research processes that attend, sustain, and foster the systematic credibility of political science, Gregor argues a special conceptual language is needed to enhance the rigor, replicability, articulation, and interpretation of political science's empirical findings.Gregor reviews the conceptual inventory of the social sciences in general with particular emphasis on distinctions between descriptive, theoretical, and normative language. He analyzes what might count as "objectivity" and "truth" in a given set of circumstances in an effort to standardize how political scientists make such distinctions. How "theory" and "explanation" might be assessed in less rigorous disciplines is also considered. Gregor is opposed to the postmodernist tendency to use "language games" in the social sciences that purport to close the gaps separating the discourses of knowledge, ethics and politics, but do so at the expense of clarity, rigor, and objectivity. In Gregor's view, these alternative perspectives have exploited vagueness and ambiguity in order to accomplish what they consider to be their political tasks. A substantial postscript to this edition traces some of the postmodernist perspectives to their origins in the works of particular individuals and to their history in the thought of twentieth-century Europe.Metascience and Politics attempts to address all these issues, with brevity and seriousness of purpose, in order to provide a defensible rationale for the scientific character of social and political studies. It will be of interest to political scientists, sociologists, philosophers, and intellectual historians.A. James Gregor is professor of political science at the University of California at Berkeley and an adjunct professor at Command and Staff College, U.S. Marine Corps University at Quantico, Virginia. He has also been awarded the Order of Merit by the President of the Italian Republic for his contribution to Italy as a nation through his published works. He is the author of Giovanni Gentile: Philosopher of Fascism, Interpretations of Fascism, Phoenix: Fascism in Our Time, and Marxism, China, and Development, all published by Transaction.

The understanding of science by members of the public has been of increasing concern to social scientists. This article argues that such understanding, or the ostensible lack of it, is structured by discourses that address science both as an abstract entity or principle (science-in-general) and as an activity directed at specific phenomena or problems (science-in particular). Drawing upon a wide range of interviews about various sources of ionizing radiation, it is suggested that understanding is tied to questions of social identity that encompass relations of differentiation from and identification with science and the institutions in which it is embedded

This book traces the development of political science from ancient influences such as Plato and Aristotle to modern political shapers such as Robert A. Dahl. It covers changes to the field in both thought and practice due to the rise and fall of political regimes, world wars, colonialism, and social media. The book also includes thorough examinations of international relations, systems of government, constitutions, domestic policy, public opinion, and administration. The book ends with brief biographies of important people in the field of political science that specifies their various contributions.