Suchergebnisse

The subject matter of what has been traditionally considered central to political science, namely, power and government, has been stolen by Foucault while central trends in the discipline as a whole have departed markedly from serious engagement with those topics. Yet Foucault's discussions and analyses of power and government are so original, so striking in their import not only for the way we do political science, but for our lives, thought, and practices as scholars, that his work ought by now to have become a focal point for the resurrection of these topics and their restoration to centrality in the discipline.

It has now been four years of contested elections for the Council of
the Association. In this note we ask: What can we learn about these
elections from a political science perspective?

Today we're looking at the UK's constitution. What form does it take? And is that changing?

Political science is two realms, the intellectual & the organizational, & the task is to consider how the organizational realm might be adapted to the highest improvement of the intellectual realm. Political science has a certain competence (domain) in the study of politics as the organization of power. It also seeks to expand competence as capability. Charles Merriam provides a point of departure. Merriam's most successful idea has been that of enhancing competence through improvements in "the field of method." Competence, however, now demands methodological flexibility, so as to probe more into the exercise of power. Four fields are strategic: public administration, political interests, urbanization, & the interpenetration of politics & economics. Competence also leads into unorthodox subjects, such as force & foolish, irrational, & pathological decision making (or "the Oxenstierna-Mullins Effect"). Finally, competence demands (& is enhanced by) the reach of political science into serious practical problems of human affairs. 106 References. Adapted from the source document.

This article first reviews the history of political science teaching in Europe before going on to consider a range of recent developments in the teaching of political science, including cross-national joint programmes; technologically enhanced learning; placement learning and problem-based learning. The last section considers a range of issues facing political science teachers, including financial pressures; EU and national government policies; Bologna and quality assurance. The article concludes by suggesting that particular attention needs to be paid to what is taught at master's and doctoral levels. Adapted from the source document.

Analysis of the pre-1989 situation and of the years of transformation, 1989-1991; Development of the discipline since 1992; Core research areas, theoretical and methodological approaches; Public space and academic debates; International cooperation and funding situation; Views on further development.

This article presents an overview of the development of political science as a discipline in the Soviet Union over the last 20 years. Such an overall perspective is not easily accessible to political scientists who do not read Russian because only a small percentage of the work appears in translation. Furthermore, many scholars believe that restrictions on publication in the USSR make Soviet academic writing unworthy of perusal—a view I strongly refute here. Trends in growth and influence of Soviet political science have a bearing on the intellectual climate of the USSR and, to a certain extent, on the politics practiced there.

"Excerpt . from an undated manuscript in the Library of Congress by R. Cleary . entitled "Brazil under the monarchy." ; "Reprinted from the Hispanic American historical review, vol. II, no. 4, November, 1919." ; Cover-title. ; Bibliographical foot-notes. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Mode of access: Internet. ; Superseded by its Studies in economics and commerce.

Throughout my life, politics and political science have been intertwined. I handed out leaflets for Adlai Stevenson at age 12, participated in protests at Oberlin and Berkeley, and, as I developed professional expertise, worked with national security agencies. Conflict has been a continuing interest, particularly whether situations are best analyzed as a security dilemma or aggression. In exploring this question, I was drawn into both political psychology and signaling, although the two are very different. I have continued to work on each and occasionally try to bring them together. My thinking about strategic interaction led to a book-length exploration of system effects, a way of thinking that I believe is still insufficiently appreciated in the discipline and among policy makers. My research continues to be stimulated by both developments in the discipline and unfolding international politics.