Suchergebnisse

In the paper the author draws attention to post-positivist concepts (T. Kuhn, I. Lakatos, St. Tulmin, P. Feyerabend), which criticize each other, offer various research strategies and models of science, actualizing its different methodological problems. Postpositivism considers a rational science reconstruction as the solution to a two-pronged task: reorienting the philosophy of science to the history of science, bringing methodological standards in line with the practice of scientific activity, and at the same time critical rethinking the traditions of historical and scientific researches, ensuring their theoretical level and proper philosophical and methodological culture. The post-positivistic model of science is characterized by a close connection of philosophical (ontological, metaphysical) concepts with scientific knowledge. Philosophy not only "influences" science as a certain external factor, but organically enters the "body" of science as an important component of the knowledge system. The paper concludes that postpositivism significantly brought the methodology of science closer to the real practice of scientific activity, contributing to the formation of the image of post-non-classical human-sized science.

"War and revolution, economic crises and political conflict are the very stuff of modern history. This guide to the last 100 years of great power conflict, social rebellion, strikes and protests gives us the essential history of the world in which we live. Based on the Timeline TV series this is a rapid and accessible guide for those who want to know how power is exercised, by who, and for what purposes in the modern world. From the rise and fall of great empires in two world wars, the Cold War and the 'war on terror' through to the rise of China Timelines describes the shifts in the imperial structure of the world. And it looks at the impact of those changes in the conflict zones of the 21st century, including Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran. Finally Timelines looks at moments of popular resistance, from the Russian and Spanish revolutions to the fall of Apartheid in the 1990s and the ongoing socialist experiment that is Hugo Chavez's Venezuela. We live in turbulent times. These essays show us how we got here and outline the forces that are going to shape the history of the 21st century"--Publisher description.

In 1863–1865, two influential Russian revolutionary-democratic journals "Sovremennik" ("The Contemporary") and "Russkoe Slovo" ("The Russian Word") debated literary and social issues. In historiography, this debate – the so-called "split among the nihilists" – was an example of political conflicts in Russian press, but the author states that a personal factor was a more important reason for that case. It was not a single occasion of personal conflicts in the journalist community in the middle and the second half of the 1860s. In this period, there were the similar episodes: Maxim Antonovich and Yuly Zhukovsky's accusation against Nikolay Nekrasov, the conflict between Alexander Herzen and "the young emigrants", the debates in the periodicals of Mikhail Elpidin' printing house, etc. They happened during the crisis of the Sixtiers movement (or the revolutionary-democratic movement), when expectations of a revolutionary explosion of the Russian people were not justified, censorship oppression rose, and political disorientation of Russian oppositional community increased. Under those circumstances, discussions did not lead to new ideas and trends, but only aggravated the depressive atmosphere in the journalistic community. Even among the Russian revolutionary diaspora – without censorship and other influence of the Russian government – publicists could not avoid personal conflicts. Many memoirs also confirm that those splits – or, more precisely, that strife – were more personal rather than political conflicts.

Cover -- Contents -- Notes on the Contributors -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- 1 Machiavelli (1469-1527) -- 2 Hobbes (1588-1679) -- 3 Locke (1632-1704) -- 4 Hume (1711-1776) -- 5 Rousseau (1712-1778) -- 6 Burke (1729-1797) -- 7 Kant (1724-1804) -- 8 Hegel (1770-1831) -- 9 Mill (1806-1873) -- 10 Marx (1818-1883) -- Bibliography -- Index.

AbstractLeaked information, such as WikiLeaks' Cablegate, constitutes a unique and valuable data source for researchers interested in a wide variety of policy‐oriented topics. Yet political scientists have avoided using leaked information in their research. This article argues that we can and should use leaked information as a data source in scholarly research. First, the methodological, ethical, and legal challenges related to the use of leaked information in research have been considered, concluding that none of these present serious obstacles. Second, how political scientists can use leaked information to generate novel and unique insights concerning political phenomena using a variety of quantitative and qualitative methods have been shown. Specifically, how leaked documents reveal important details concerning the Trans‐Pacific Partnership negotiations, and how leaked diplomatic cables highlight a significant disparity between the U.S. government's public attitude toward traditional knowledge and its private behavior have been demonstrated.

A challenge to Giovanni Sartori's "Where Is Political Science Going?" (2004), which asserted that US political science was headed nowhere, describes three programs that demonstrate the disciplines continued intellectual vitality: John Rawls's individualist theory of justice; the median voter theorem; & Stein Rokkan's historical & comparative project on the development of modern democracy. These research programs are seen to combine the normative, analytic, & empirical domains in a fruitful manner. Further, scholars involved in these programs belie the notion that political science is solely an American endeavor. J. Zendejas