Suchergebnisse

C. P. Snow, in his Rede Lecture on the scientific and literary worlds as separate cultures, lists four groups needed by a country if it is to "come out top" in the scientific revolution. First, as many top scientists as it can produce; second, a larger group trained for supporting research and high class design; third, educated supporting technicians; and "fourthly and last, politicians, administrators, an entire community, who know enough science to have a sense of what the scientists are talking about."It seems increasingly clear that the growing army of "political" scientists—meaning natural scientists in politics—is more likely to be aided by students of politics prepared to understand the effects of science in political terms than by most of the recent efforts to understand politics in scientific terms. When one looks over the journals in political science, and in related areas of public opinion and social psychology, searching for significant conclusions in articles where much time has been spent on the elaboration of method, it is difficult to avoid V. O. Key's conclusion "that a considerable proportion of the literature commonly classified under the heading of 'political behavior' has no real bearing on politics, or at least that its relevance has not been made clear."

Like Rachel, Jacob's beloved but still childless bride, who asked herself and the Lord each morning, "Am I?," or "Can I?," so presidents of this Association on these annual occasions intermittently ask, "Are we a science?," or "Can we become one?" My predecessor, David Truman, raised this question last September applying some of the notions of Thomas Kuhn in his recent book on scientific revolutions. I shall be following in Truman's footsteps, repeating much that he said but viewing the development of the profession from a somewhat different perspective and intellectual history. My comments will be organized around three assertions.First, there was a coherent theoretical formulation in the American political theory of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.Second, the development of professional political science in the United States from the turn of the century until well into the 1950's was carried on largely in terms of this paradigm, to use Kuhn's term. The most significant and characteristic theoretical speculation and research during these decades produced anomalous findings which cumulatively shook its validity.Third, in the last decade or two the elements of a new, more surely scientific paradigm seem to be manifesting themselves rapidly. The core concept of this new approach is that of the political system.

ÖZETİnsanları diğer canlılardan ayıran en önemli özellikler hayal gücü ve yaratım yeteneğidir. Bu her iki vasıf da insanların hem özel, hem de kamusal hayatları için vazgeçilmezdir. İnsanlar yüzyıllar boyunca yaşam şekillerini, toplulukları, halkları, devletleri ve hükümet sistemlerini tasavvur etmişler ve sonuç olarak kendi tasavvurlarını vücuda getirmişlerdir. İster gerçeğe dönüşsün, ister asla gerçekleştirilemeyecek ütopyalar (hatta distopyalar) olarak kalsın, hayal gücünün dünyanın işleyiş biçimine doğrudan katkısı vardır. Politika, uluslar arası ilişkiler, bilim, sanat ve edebiyatta bu hayal gücünün sonuçlarını ve yansımalarını rahatlıkla görebiliriz. Bununla birlikte, bu yansımanın karşılıklı olduğunu da söyleyebiliriz. Hayal gücü politikayı ve politik sistemleri etkilediği kadar, bu sistemler ve politikadaki değişimler de insanların fikirlerini etkiler, özellikle de sınırsız bir hayal gücüne sahip olanları. Bu bağlamda, bilim kurgu edebiyatının usta kalemleri kendi ütopyan ve distopyan dünyalarını yaratmış ve dünya çapında yankı bularak diğer insanların fikirlerini de etkilemişlerdir. Hayallerle gerçekler arasındaki bu etkileşim en iyi bilim kurgunun başyapıtlarında görülmektedir. Politik ideolojiler (ki bunlar da sonuçta kağıt üzerindeki tasavvurlardır) ve ütopyan / distopyan romanlar arasındaki bağlantılar ve karşılaştırmalar William Morris'in News From Nowhere (Hiçbir Yerden Haberler), Aldous Huxley'nin Brave New World (Cesur Yeni Dünya), Ursula K. Le Guin'in The Dispossessed (Mülksüzler) and William Gibson'ın Neuromancer (Matrix Avcısı) adlı kitaplarında incelenmiştir. Bu romanlar ütopyan ya da distopyan dünyaları resmederek bize alternatif gerçeklikleri gösterirken, bir yandan da geçmişi ve şimdiyi yansıtarak bize geleceğe ilişkin rehberler sunmaktadır.ABSTRACTThe most important elements that separate humans from other living organisms are the power of imagination and the gift of creation. Both abilities are crucial in people's lives, private and public. For centuries humankind imagined their life styles, communities, societies, states, government systems and as a result, they created their own imaginations. Whether they become realities or utopias (maybe dystopias), imagination has a lot to do with how the world works. In politics, international relations, science, art and literature, we can see the outcomes and reflections of human imagination. Besides, we can also say that this reflection works both ways. Just as much as imagination affects politics, political systems and political changes also affect the minds of people, especially those with a boundless imagination. In this context, the masters of science fiction literature have built utopian and dystopian worlds of their own and have affected the minds of other people throughout the world. The interaction between imagination and reality is best seen in these sci-fi masterpieces. The connections and comparisons between political ideologies (which are also imaginations put on paper) and utopian / dystopian novels are examined in William Morris's News From Nowhere, Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, Ursula K. Le Guin's The Dispossessed and William Gibson's Neuromancer. These novels present us alternative realities by picturing utopian or dystopian worlds and by reflecting our history and present, they offer us guides towards the future.

Much of this essay falls within the realm of speculative thought. Since it is in the nature of speculation that one's words may appear immodest and his conclusions often eccentric, I shall state my arguments at the outset without pausing to elaborate them. The arguments themselves are quite simple. Each of them will reappear later on clothed, I hope, in more attractive dress.Two varieties of political thought contended for the allegiance of the American people at the founding of the new nation. The two seem irreconcilable in certain crucial respects.One was notable for its expression of friendship and brotherhood, for its insistence upon individual spontaneity and uniqueness, and for its disdain for material concerns; it was intuitive and unsystematic in temper. The other displayed a preoccupation with social order, procedural rationality, and the material bases of political association and division; it was abstract and systematic in temper.The exponents of the latter point of view, having put their opponents to rout, assumed the responsibility for organizing the government and politics of the country. They enacted their psychological, social, economic, and political theories into fundamental law, then erected insititutions designed to train generations of citizens to prefer certain goods and conduct over all others.

Provides an overview of Swedish political science education & research. It is noted that Sweden has not often been at the cutting edge of the discipline, but the importance of that is pondered. Some information on the Swedish Political Science Association & the major journal, Statsvetenskaplig Tidskrift, is offered. References. J. Zendejas