Suchergebnisse

The Disaster Research Center (DRC) at the University of Delaware, with the financial support of the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the College of Arts and Sciences, held a two-day conference titled "Disaster Research in the Social Sciences: Lessons Learned, Challenges, and Future Trajectories." The conference highlighted the interdisciplinary and international nature of the disaster research field and focused on: 1) the growth and development of the field of disasters, from the perspective of the Social Sciences; 2) theoretical, methodological, and public policy contributions of the field; 3) lessons learned and best practices that have emerged from this area of research; and 4) future trajectories or opportunities for Social Science research in the study of disasters. Conference participants included leading scholars and researchers, practitioners, representatives from funding organizations, and graduate and undergraduate students. The conference allowed participants to discuss substantive, theoretical, and methodological issues and concerns relevant to the field as well as to generate new research initiatives that will contribute to our understanding and knowledge regarding the study of disasters. Substantive and critical issues discussed during this two-day conference included: the growth and development of disaster research in the Social Sciences; theoretical and methodological contributions and challenges in disaster research; impact of disaster research for practitioners; the role and importance of multi- and inter-disciplinary research in the disaster field; the development of an international research agenda; the role of research centers in training the new generation of researchers; funding disaster research and priorities for the future in a post-9/11 environment; major research areas and issues that need to be developed and explored over the next decade at both the national and international level; and efforts to establish collaborative research initiatives across disciplines and geographical boundaries. DRC was the first Social Science research center in the world devoted to the study of disasters, so it was appropriate and timely that a conference of such magnitude was held at the University of Delaware at a particularly historical moment for the DRC and the field of disaster studies. This conference not only provided a stimulating intellectual environment but it also presented an opportunity to celebrate DRC's 40 th anniversary and to examine the impact and contributions of the Center to the field of disaster research both nationally and internationally. Moreover, during the two-day event, conference participants had an opportunity to pay tribute to Enrico L. Quarantelli and Russell R. Dynes, two of the founding fathers of DRC and disaster research from a social science perspective.

In recent decades, traditional ways of doing science have beenquestioned. On the one hand, the crisis of modernity has cast doubt overthe place of reason and on the other, globalization has generated economic,social and cultural changes in today's society, which have questioned theparadigms of the social sciences. Within this framework, political sciencehas not evaded such questioning because of the preeminence of positivismand its empiricist accent, where social intervention has occupied a pejorativeplace. The concern of the discipline to comply with scientific requirementshas made it impossible to grant a role to social intervention. However,these obstacles have their origin in the difficulties that the discipline has in solving basic questions such as: what is the purpose of the knowledge thatis constructed? Therefore, it can be said that the discipline has not wantedto give a place to the intervention and that it is incapable of doing so until itresolves the serious difficulties it has. Today, the social sciences have beenconfronted with a complex and diverse context that demands the resolutionand transformation of social problems. In this perspective, political sciencemust rethink itself as a discipline and examine its future in the face of current demands and needs. ; En las últimas décadas las maneras tradicionales de hacer ciencia hansido objeto de cuestionamiento. Por un lado, la crisis de la modernidadha puesto en duda el lugar de la razón y por el otro, la globalización ha generado cambios económicos, sociales y culturales en la sociedad actual,que han puesto en duda los paradigmas de las ciencias sociales. Dentrode este marco, la Ciencia Política no ha estado libre de cuestionamientopor la preeminencia del positivismo y su acento empirista, en donde laintervención social ha ocupado un lugar peyorativo. La preocupación de ladisciplina por cumplir con los requisitos de cientificidad ha imposibilitadootorgar un papel a la intervención social. Sin embargo, estos obstáculos tienen origen en las dificultades que tiene la disciplina en resolvercuestiones básicas tales como: el para qué del conocimiento que seconstruye. De esta manera, se puede afirmar que la disciplina no ha querido darle un lugar a la intervención y que esta incapacitada en hacerlo hastaque resuelva las serias dificultades que tiene. Hoy las ciencias socialesse hayan confrontadas por un contexto complejo y diverso que demanda la resolución y transformaciones de las problemáticas sociales. En estaperspectiva, la Ciencia Política tiene y debe repensarse como disciplina yexaminar el lugar que puede acoger frente a las demandas y necesidades actuales.

In search of relevance to social reform and policy-making / David L. Featherman, Maris A. Vinovskis -- Knowledge for the public good: the emergence of social sciences and social reform in late-nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century America, 1880-1940 / Martin Bulmer -- Growth and use of social and behavioral science in the federal government since World War II / David L. Featherman, Maris A. Vinovskis -- Designing head start: roles played by developmental psychologists / Sheldon H. White, Deborah A. Phillips -- Policy, aging, and the graying of society / W. Andrew Achenbaum -- Welfare reform policy from Nixon to Clinton: what role for social science? / Sheldon Danziger -- Welfare reform at the state level: the role of social experiments and demonstrations / Judith M. Gueron -- The making and analysis of public policy: a perspective on the role of social science / Laurence E. Lynn Jr

A signal feature of legal and political institutions is that they exercise coercive power. The essays in this volume examine institutional coercion with the aim of trying to understand its nature, justification and limits. Included are essays that take a fresh look at perennial questions. Leading scholars from philosophy, political science and law examine these and related questions shedding new light on an apparently inescapable feature of political and legal life: Coercion.

At some point during the 1950s, mainstream American philosophy of science began increasingly to avoid questions about the role of non-cognitive values in science and, accordingly, increasingly to avoid active engagement with social, political and moral concerns. Such questions and engagement eventually ceased to be part of the mainstream. Here we show that the eventual dominance of 'valuefree' philosophy of science can be attributed, at least in part, to the policies of the U.S. National Science Foundation's "History and Philosophy of Science" sub-program. In turn, the sub-program's policies were set by logical empiricists who espoused value-free philosophy of science; these philosophers' actions, we also point out, fit a broad pattern, one in which analytic philosophers used institutional control to marginalize rival approaches to philosophy. We go on to draw on existing knowledge of this pattern to suggest two further, similar, contributors to the withdrawal from valueladen philosophy of science, namely decisions by the editors of Philosophy of Science and by the editors of The Journal of Philosophy. Political climate was, we argue, at most an indirect contributor to the withdrawal and was neither a factor that decided whether it occurred nor one that was sufficient to bring it about. Moreover, we argue that the actions at the National Science Foundation went beyond what was required by its senior administrators and are better viewed as part of what drove, rather than as what was being driven by, the adoption of logical empiricism by the philosophy of science community

Front Matter -- Front Cover -- Half Title Page -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table Of Contents -- Author's Note -- Contents -- The Domain -- Modes and Forms -- The State and Order -- Manifestations of Power -- Action -- Of Politics -- Politics and History -- Politics and Morality -- Principles -- Of Justice -- Of Freedom -- Of Equality -- Of Rights and Duties -- Presuppositions and Some Consequences -- Back Matter -- Index of Proper Names -- Subject Index -- Back Cover.

Ob in einfachen zwischenmenschlichen Beziehungen oder in den komplexen Strukturen von Politik und Gesellschaft: Macht ist in allen sozialen Situationen wirksam. Der Band bietet eine interdisziplinäre Einführung in das Thema Macht sowie Darstellungen aktueller und innovativer Theorien aus den Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften. Etablierte Forscher und Nachwuchswissenschaftler aus unterschiedlichen Disziplinen eröffnen Perspektiven auf diesen gesellschaftlichen Fundamentalbegriff und legen die sozialphilosophischen, semiotischen und kommunikativen Eigenschaften von Macht frei.

This article proposes some of the components for a social science strategy for conducting policy-relevant research on fair housing issues. Three components are proposed for the development of a more comprehensive strategy aimed at racial discrimination and integration. Included in this analysis is a discussion of major conceptual, methodological, and analysis issues related to race, housing, and public policies.