Suchergebnisse

This book, written by a philosopher interested in the problems of social science and scientific method, and a sociologist interested in the philosophy of science, presents a novel conception of how we should think about and carry out the scientific study of social life. This book combines an evaluation of different conceptions of the nature of science with an examination of important sociological theorists and frameworks. Originally published in 1975

Talk is of central importance to politics of almost every kind-it's no accident that when the ancient Greeks first attempted to examine politics systematically, they developed the study of rhetoric. In Tropes of Politics, John Nelson applies rhetorical analysis first to political theory, and then to politics in practice. He offers a full and deep critical examination of political science and political theory as fields of study, and then undertakes a series of creative examinations of political rhetoric, including a deconstruction of deliberation and debate by the U.S. Senate prior to the Gulf War. Using the neglected arts of argument refined by the rhetoric of inquiry, Nelson traces how everyday words like consent and debate construct politics in much the same way that poets such as Mamet and Shakespeare construct plays, and he shows how we are remaking our politics even as we speak. Tropes of Politics explores how politicians take stands and political scientists probe representation, how experts become informed even as citizens become authorities, how students actually reinvent government while professors merely model politics, how senators wage war yet keep comity among themselves. The action, Nelson shows, is in the tropes: these figures of speech and images of deed can persuade us to turn from ideologies like liberalism toward spectacles about democracy or movements into environmentalism and feminism. His argument is that inventive attention to tropes can mean better participation in politics. And the argument is in the tropes-evidence itself as sights or citations, governments as machines or men, politics as hardball or softball, deliberations as freedoms or constraints, borders as fringes or friends.

Many philosophers of science have maintained that science should be value-free; still others believe that such ideal is neither achievable nor desirable for science. Hugh Lacey is presently one of the main supporters of the idea of value-free science and his theory is probably the most debated today and attracts the most attention and criticism. Therefore, in this text, I will primarily analyze his theory of value-free science. After briefly defining the notion of value I highlight which strategy Lacey chooses to lay a firm foundation for the concept of science without value, with his starting point being the differentiation between cognitive and non-cognitive values. Then I describe three basic characteristics of Lacey's value-free science: impartiality, neutrality, and autonomy. However, the overall plan and design of his project, together with some concrete steps he takes, are not without problems in our view. I will try to point out some of these problematic issues and provide brief suggestions for alleviating them.

This work is devoted to developing as well as expounding the theory of the cultural sciences of the philosopher Alfred Schutz (1899-1959). Drawing on all of Schutz's seven volumes in English, the book shows how his philosophical theory consists of the reflective clarifications of the disciplinary definitions, basic concepts, and distinctive methods of particular cultural sciences as well as their species and genus. The book first expounds Schutz's own theories of economics, jurisprudence, political science, sociology, and psychology. It then extends his approach to other disciplines, offering new theories of archaeology, ethnology, and psychotherapy in his spirit in order to stimulate the development of Schutzian theories in these and other disciplines. The second part of the book contains complementary philosophical chapters devoted to culture, groups, ideal types, interdisciplinarity, meaning, relevance, social tension, and verification.

This work is devoted to developing as well as expounding the theory of the cultural sciences of the philosopher Alfred Schutz (1899-1959). Drawing on all of Schutz's seven volumes in English, the book shows how his philosophical theory consists of the reflective clarifications of the disciplinary definitions, basic concepts, and distinctive methods of particular cultural sciences as well as their species and genus. The book first expounds Schutz's own theories of economics, jurisprudence, political science, sociology, and psychology. It then extends his approach to other disciplines, offering

This work, sequel to the author's Theories of Civil Violence, attacks questions that have long troubled social science and social scientists - questions of the cumulative nature of social inquiry. Does the knowledge generated by the study of social, political, and economic life grow more comprehensive over time? These questions go to the heart of social scientists' soul-searching as to whether they are indeed engaged in 'science'. The author pursues these questions through in-depth examination of various theoretical programs currently influential in social science, including feminist social science, rational choice theory, network analysis and others

This special issue originated with the 1996 Organization Science Winter Conference (OSWC), which set out to explore the implications of the science of complexity for the field of organization studies. Following the OSWC, a formal program organized by the Organization Science section of INFORMS took place in Atlanta. The vast potential for complexity theory to inform and transform research in organization studies became evident from the discussions of 22 papers that were presented at that meeting. In response to the call for papers issued after the Atlanta meeting, 56 papers were submitted to Organization Science, of which seven make up this issue. Interest in complexity has grown dramatically since the 1996 OSWC first explored this idea. The purpose of this special issue is not to declare that a new era in organization studies and strategic management is at hand, but to explore the boundaries and links between the science of complexity—with its origin in evolution and biology—and the field of strategy and organization. The issue explores the implications of complexity research for organization studies in the context of new ways of modeling dynamic, nonlinear complex systems for advancing theoretical and empirical research in organization studies (e.g., theorizing within coevolutionary frameworks, decomposition of nested phenomena, multidirectional causalities).

"In den USA gewinnt eine neue 'biopolitische' Wissenschaftsprogrammatik an institutioneller Wichtigkeit. Sie materialisiert sich zugleich als ein genereller Vorwurf an die Politikwissenschaft, die in ihrer Konzeption 'untheoretisch' sei. John R. Hibbing und seine KollegInnen bauen auf den früheren Arbeiten der soziobiologischen Politikwissenschaft auf, lassen dabei aber den Rational-Choice-Ansatz von Robert Axelrod vollkommen aus. Axelrod leistet jedoch eine bedeutende interdisziplinäre Arbeit in der Politikwissenschaft und Biologie und hatte besonders hinsichtlich seines Konzeptes der 'Evolution der Kooperation' mit einem der einflussreichsten Insekt-Ethologen, Evolutionstheoretiker und Soziobiologen W.D. Hamilton zusammengearbeitet. Warum interessiert sich dann Hibbing für Axelrod so wenig? Ausgehend von dieser Frage wird die jeweilige Praxis der Theorie von Hibbing und Axelrod verglichen. Beide sind Teil der Mainstream-Tradition der amerikanischen positivistischen Politikwissenschaft, sie fassen jedoch die 'Theorie' als solche unterschiedlich auf. Der Vergleich beinhaltet somit drei Aspekte: die auf das 19. Jahrhundert zurückgehenden Wurzel der aktuellen Konzeption der Politikwissenschaft, Natur/ Kultur und des 'Charakters'; die Entwicklungen der Genomik und das Potenzial eines neuen Naturalismus; und die in außergewöhnlicher Weise verflochtenen Entwicklungen des Nachkriegs-Rational-Choice-Ansatzes und des Neodarwinismus." (Autorenreferat)

Science et idéologie dans la théorie des classes de MarxCet article vise à démontrer l'articulation des principes qui fondent la théorie des classes sociales chez Marx de façon à permettre une meilleure compréhension de la continuité fondamentale qui lie l'humanitarisme du jeune Marx au matérialisme scientifique des œuvres plus mûres. En réponse à ceux qui considèrent l'humanisme « idéologique » des Manuscrits de 1844 comme étant pré-scientifiques ou radicalement différents du matérialisme historique, l'auteur soutient que le concept de classe, qui est au cœur même des écrits considérés comme scientifiques, trouve sa source dans la conception que Marx se faisait de la nature humaine lors de ses premières œuvres. Il suggère de plus que la distinction entre science et idéologie n'est pas aussi évidente que certains le voudraient, Marx étant considéré comme scientifique, non pas en dépit, mais précisément à cause de son engagement partisan et révolutionnaire.