Suchergebnisse
Filter
6541 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
Modeliavimo reikšmė socialiniame moksle ; The role of modelling in social science
The paper presents an overview of M. Weber's modelling paradigm assessing it against the opportunities of using the models in modern science of public policy and administration. Two types of research problems requiring modelling of different levels are identified. The paper defines the static and the dialectic methods of modelling, the limits and possibilities of their application are defined. The novelty and relevance of the paper lies in the substantiation of advantages and drawbacks of static modelling and in the proving of the importance of normative character of science, which contradicts the traditional Weber's methodology. In public administration one may not rely only upon formal procedures, forms and rules, because this will not reveal the functions of the State and the interests underlying them. A public administration model must be characterised by normative content. Models of social processes must not necessarily reflect the reality exactly, however, they may serve as a tool for simplifying the mechanisms of social reality and for attempting to understand its mechanisms. Modelling may be static or dialectic. Static modelling is simpler since the number of variables it takes account of is smaller. In certain cases static modelling may be presented or desirable due to value considerations raised by the idealistic world. Idealistic philosophy gives rise to relevant phenomena, which can be neither confirmed nor rejected. Such models may be desirable as the given required by a peculiar belief and as components of the given. As far as social science is a value and "humanitarian" science, to such extent metaphysics, the static given and static modelling may yield results. Philosophical idealism is often presented as a source of political and economic liberalism, or a sign of equality Is placed between them. This is not entirely correct since state and social policy studies in the liberal social sciences are based on formal concepts without any normative content. Liberal sociological definitions designed for a parliamentary-democratic constitutional state usually cover only procedures, forms, rules and state activity instruments, avoiding a definition of the State's functions completely or partially. Not only the functions of the State remain unsubstantiated; possible consequences of manifestation of these functions or the interests of those who defend them or any backstairs interests behind the declared interests arc not explained. The Weberian methodological concept of democracy turns liberal democracy and pluralist theory into a sheer arsenal of technical means, which is unpredictable and incapable of explaining the deep phenomena of public administration and the more so - of social policy. It is not only in the West, but also in Eastern Europe including Lithuania, individual politicians and public administration experts wish to reduce the principle of social welfare to the constitutional and legal level, absolutising the legal aspect. Dialectic modelling is a kind of opposite to static modelling, or modelling that may supplement the latter substantially. And this is not just because it is able to "see the context". Using the dialectic relationship one may examine such historical dichotomies as belief and science, nationality and globalism, central and local government, private and public interest etc. In the most general sense, dialectic modelling is focussed on the determination of the content, form, contradiction between content and form, and finding of the place of this relationship in the world's development process. The methodology of dialectic modelling asserts that the dialectic relationship is a universal means of modelling of qualitative processes and may be used for the modelling of the processes for which sufficient qualitative exceptionality may be determined as compared with the previous qualitative stage. Eastern Europe encounters difficulties in social modelling due to a distinct transformational nature of social systems of these countries as well as due to frequent changes in the laws governing social security and tax policy. The latter factor also poses problems for Eastern European social scientists in processing the material and in modelling socio-economic development on its basis.
BASE
Modeliavimo reikšmė socialiniame moksle ; The role of modelling in social science
The paper presents an overview of M. Weber's modelling paradigm assessing it against the opportunities of using the models in modern science of public policy and administration. Two types of research problems requiring modelling of different levels are identified. The paper defines the static and the dialectic methods of modelling, the limits and possibilities of their application are defined. The novelty and relevance of the paper lies in the substantiation of advantages and drawbacks of static modelling and in the proving of the importance of normative character of science, which contradicts the traditional Weber's methodology. In public administration one may not rely only upon formal procedures, forms and rules, because this will not reveal the functions of the State and the interests underlying them. A public administration model must be characterised by normative content. Models of social processes must not necessarily reflect the reality exactly, however, they may serve as a tool for simplifying the mechanisms of social reality and for attempting to understand its mechanisms. Modelling may be static or dialectic. Static modelling is simpler since the number of variables it takes account of is smaller. In certain cases static modelling may be presented or desirable due to value considerations raised by the idealistic world. Idealistic philosophy gives rise to relevant phenomena, which can be neither confirmed nor rejected. Such models may be desirable as the given required by a peculiar belief and as components of the given. As far as social science is a value and "humanitarian" science, to such extent metaphysics, the static given and static modelling may yield results. Philosophical idealism is often presented as a source of political and economic liberalism, or a sign of equality Is placed between them. This is not entirely correct since state and social policy studies in the liberal social sciences are based on formal concepts without any normative content. Liberal sociological definitions designed for a parliamentary-democratic constitutional state usually cover only procedures, forms, rules and state activity instruments, avoiding a definition of the State's functions completely or partially. Not only the functions of the State remain unsubstantiated; possible consequences of manifestation of these functions or the interests of those who defend them or any backstairs interests behind the declared interests arc not explained. The Weberian methodological concept of democracy turns liberal democracy and pluralist theory into a sheer arsenal of technical means, which is unpredictable and incapable of explaining the deep phenomena of public administration and the more so - of social policy. It is not only in the West, but also in Eastern Europe including Lithuania, individual politicians and public administration experts wish to reduce the principle of social welfare to the constitutional and legal level, absolutising the legal aspect. Dialectic modelling is a kind of opposite to static modelling, or modelling that may supplement the latter substantially. And this is not just because it is able to "see the context". Using the dialectic relationship one may examine such historical dichotomies as belief and science, nationality and globalism, central and local government, private and public interest etc. In the most general sense, dialectic modelling is focussed on the determination of the content, form, contradiction between content and form, and finding of the place of this relationship in the world's development process. The methodology of dialectic modelling asserts that the dialectic relationship is a universal means of modelling of qualitative processes and may be used for the modelling of the processes for which sufficient qualitative exceptionality may be determined as compared with the previous qualitative stage. Eastern Europe encounters difficulties in social modelling due to a distinct transformational nature of social systems of these countries as well as due to frequent changes in the laws governing social security and tax policy. The latter factor also poses problems for Eastern European social scientists in processing the material and in modelling socio-economic development on its basis.
BASE
Friedricho Nietzsche's politinė filosofija kaip politinė antropologija ; Friedrich Nietzsche's political philosophy as political anthropology
The article starts with the question: how is the political philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche even possible? The author discusses with Tracy B. Strong's presumption that Nietzsche's political philosophy is not possible as a transcendental deduction. The author supposes that this type of question clashes with the premises of Nietzsche's thinking and also undermines the interpretation of the other aspects of his philosophy. First of all: the question of nazification and denazification of Nietzsche's thought. The article comes to the conclusion that in the scope of recent investigation there is not much sense in raising the question whether Nietzsche's political views are political philosophy in the normative meaning of the term, but it is possible to discuss the question of political anthropology as the psychology of the nations Nietzsche was really interested in.
BASE
Friedricho Nietzsche's politinė filosofija kaip politinė antropologija ; Friedrich Nietzsche's political philosophy as political anthropology
The article starts with the question: how is the political philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche even possible? The author discusses with Tracy B. Strong's presumption that Nietzsche's political philosophy is not possible as a transcendental deduction. The author supposes that this type of question clashes with the premises of Nietzsche's thinking and also undermines the interpretation of the other aspects of his philosophy. First of all: the question of nazification and denazification of Nietzsche's thought. The article comes to the conclusion that in the scope of recent investigation there is not much sense in raising the question whether Nietzsche's political views are political philosophy in the normative meaning of the term, but it is possible to discuss the question of political anthropology as the psychology of the nations Nietzsche was really interested in.
BASE
Friedricho Nietzsche's politinė filosofija kaip politinė antropologija ; Friedrich Nietzsche's political philosophy as political anthropology
The article starts with the question: how is the political philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche even possible? The author discusses with Tracy B. Strong's presumption that Nietzsche's political philosophy is not possible as a transcendental deduction. The author supposes that this type of question clashes with the premises of Nietzsche's thinking and also undermines the interpretation of the other aspects of his philosophy. First of all: the question of nazification and denazification of Nietzsche's thought. The article comes to the conclusion that in the scope of recent investigation there is not much sense in raising the question whether Nietzsche's political views are political philosophy in the normative meaning of the term, but it is possible to discuss the question of political anthropology as the psychology of the nations Nietzsche was really interested in.
BASE
Friedricho Nietzsche's politinė filosofija kaip politinė antropologija ; Friedrich Nietzsche's political philosophy as political anthropology
The article starts with the question: how is the political philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche even possible? The author discusses with Tracy B. Strong's presumption that Nietzsche's political philosophy is not possible as a transcendental deduction. The author supposes that this type of question clashes with the premises of Nietzsche's thinking and also undermines the interpretation of the other aspects of his philosophy. First of all: the question of nazification and denazification of Nietzsche's thought. The article comes to the conclusion that in the scope of recent investigation there is not much sense in raising the question whether Nietzsche's political views are political philosophy in the normative meaning of the term, but it is possible to discuss the question of political anthropology as the psychology of the nations Nietzsche was really interested in.
BASE
Paslaugų sutartys: CK ir DCFR palyginimas ; Contracts of services: the civil code compared to the draft common frame of reference
Contracts of Services: the Civil Code Compared to the Draft Common Frame of Reference Service contracts - legal instrument often used in civil relations which seeks to establish set-off obligations between the provider and client. Despite the daily consumption of services, this institute is considered one of the obligations and civil rights and obligations incurred, and thus has jurisdiction over isolated in a separate section of the regulation. However, as is seen from the master work of analysis, the Service Agreement has a complex structure and there is no universal service contract term definition. Therefore, often a dispute arises between contractors, interpreting the mutual rights and obligations. Master's thesis analyzed on the basis of these services contractual relationship governing sources: the Civil Code and the Draft Common Frame of Reference. Analysis carried out a comparative approach, comparing the contract service provisions of the Civil Code with the provisions of Draft Common Frame of Reference. The paper compares the provisions governing the concept of a service contract, the parties' relationship, service and price of the service contract to fulfill the legal consequences. This analysis shows that most of the Civil Code and Draft Common Frame of Reference provisions essentially are the same. this was of great importance to unify European Union Member States legal regulation. However, there are many significant differences that occur, for example, an object of the service contract institute or any other character.
BASE
Paslaugų sutartys: CK ir DCFR palyginimas ; Contracts of services: the civil code compared to the draft common frame of reference
Contracts of Services: the Civil Code Compared to the Draft Common Frame of Reference Service contracts - legal instrument often used in civil relations which seeks to establish set-off obligations between the provider and client. Despite the daily consumption of services, this institute is considered one of the obligations and civil rights and obligations incurred, and thus has jurisdiction over isolated in a separate section of the regulation. However, as is seen from the master work of analysis, the Service Agreement has a complex structure and there is no universal service contract term definition. Therefore, often a dispute arises between contractors, interpreting the mutual rights and obligations. Master's thesis analyzed on the basis of these services contractual relationship governing sources: the Civil Code and the Draft Common Frame of Reference. Analysis carried out a comparative approach, comparing the contract service provisions of the Civil Code with the provisions of Draft Common Frame of Reference. The paper compares the provisions governing the concept of a service contract, the parties' relationship, service and price of the service contract to fulfill the legal consequences. This analysis shows that most of the Civil Code and Draft Common Frame of Reference provisions essentially are the same. this was of great importance to unify European Union Member States legal regulation. However, there are many significant differences that occur, for example, an object of the service contract institute or any other character.
BASE
Belarusian political nomadism ; Baltarusiškas politinis nomadiškumas
Engaging in civil society activities in Belarus is a challenge, thats why some organisations and activists move between two countries in order to continue their civic activities. In this thesis, we describe such people as "Belarusian political nomads". The central motivation for this dissertation is to extend understanding about Belarusian political migration and nomadism, and to critically enquire into the nomadic motives and strategies chosen by NGO activists from Belarus, and into the conditions that enable and support these strategies. The thesis describes the migratory and nomadic experiences of Belarusian political nomads, and explains how the transnational subjectivities of Belarusian political nomads are formed. Overall, 24 semi-structured interviews were conducted. The data collected was analysed using post-structural concepts and elements from the narrative research. We concluded that in Belarus regime acts towards Belarusian political nomads as a preventer and discourager. Political nomads interpret their migration experiences by incorporating elements from different spheres of life and the identities that are offered to them. Belarusian political nomads often considered the same events as turning points, however the ways in which they impact each political nomad individually, are complex and diverse.
BASE
Belarusian political nomadism ; Baltarusiškas politinis nomadiškumas
Engaging in civil society activities in Belarus is a challenge, thats why some organisations and activists move between two countries in order to continue their civic activities. In this thesis, we describe such people as "Belarusian political nomads". The central motivation for this dissertation is to extend understanding about Belarusian political migration and nomadism, and to critically enquire into the nomadic motives and strategies chosen by NGO activists from Belarus, and into the conditions that enable and support these strategies. The thesis describes the migratory and nomadic experiences of Belarusian political nomads, and explains how the transnational subjectivities of Belarusian political nomads are formed. Overall, 24 semi-structured interviews were conducted. The data collected was analysed using post-structural concepts and elements from the narrative research. We concluded that in Belarus regime acts towards Belarusian political nomads as a preventer and discourager. Political nomads interpret their migration experiences by incorporating elements from different spheres of life and the identities that are offered to them. Belarusian political nomads often considered the same events as turning points, however the ways in which they impact each political nomad individually, are complex and diverse.
BASE
Belarusian political nomadism ; Baltarusiškas politinis nomadiškumas
Engaging in civil society activities in Belarus is a challenge, thats why some organisations and activists move between two countries in order to continue their civic activities. In this thesis, we describe such people as "Belarusian political nomads". The central motivation for this dissertation is to extend understanding about Belarusian political migration and nomadism, and to critically enquire into the nomadic motives and strategies chosen by NGO activists from Belarus, and into the conditions that enable and support these strategies. The thesis describes the migratory and nomadic experiences of Belarusian political nomads, and explains how the transnational subjectivities of Belarusian political nomads are formed. Overall, 24 semi-structured interviews were conducted. The data collected was analysed using post-structural concepts and elements from the narrative research. We concluded that in Belarus regime acts towards Belarusian political nomads as a preventer and discourager. Political nomads interpret their migration experiences by incorporating elements from different spheres of life and the identities that are offered to them. Belarusian political nomads often considered the same events as turning points, however the ways in which they impact each political nomad individually, are complex and diverse.
BASE
Pozityvizmo ir postpozityvizmo ginčas socialiniuose moksluose ; Positivism-postpositivism debat bate in social sciences
The article explores positivism-postpositivism debate in social sciences that has been lasting already for many years. The author does not suppose this debate will end soon since it raises fundamental questions concerning the aims, tasks and methods of social sciences. Though representatives of these sciences differ significantly in views on these questions, the most of them and, in particular, evident majority of representatives of political science virtually holds positivist views. Such questions, which may be called conceptual, are essentially disputable, so they can not be resolved by any empirical research. When examining positivism-postpositivism debate the author singles out, paying tribute to tradition, three aspects of debate: (1) ontological, (2) epistemological, and (3) methodological. Yet he presents the arguments to support his claim that because of its antimetaphysical character positivism can have no ontology at all. Therefore an ontological dispute between positivists and postpositivists is simply impossible. Postpositivists, in discussing epistemological questions, would be inclined to reject positivist viewpoint that our statements and theories about social life can be true (though according to modern positivists, we can never know it for sure). They also would reject the positivist distinction between facts and values, which likewise can be considered as epistemological. But the most serious dispute that is taking place in social sciences concerns methodological questions. The author, in analyzing it, pays most attention to two most influential forms of postpositivism, namely to critical theory and postmodernism. Having discussed genealogy and deconstruction which, though with serious reservations, may be considered as postpositivist methods, the author claims that postpositivism lacks the main part of methodology, i.e. rules of accepting scientific statements and theories. And that is why postpositivism can not win the methodological debate over positivism which has such rules.
BASE
Pozityvizmo ir postpozityvizmo ginčas socialiniuose moksluose ; Positivism-postpositivism debat bate in social sciences
The article explores positivism-postpositivism debate in social sciences that has been lasting already for many years. The author does not suppose this debate will end soon since it raises fundamental questions concerning the aims, tasks and methods of social sciences. Though representatives of these sciences differ significantly in views on these questions, the most of them and, in particular, evident majority of representatives of political science virtually holds positivist views. Such questions, which may be called conceptual, are essentially disputable, so they can not be resolved by any empirical research. When examining positivism-postpositivism debate the author singles out, paying tribute to tradition, three aspects of debate: (1) ontological, (2) epistemological, and (3) methodological. Yet he presents the arguments to support his claim that because of its antimetaphysical character positivism can have no ontology at all. Therefore an ontological dispute between positivists and postpositivists is simply impossible. Postpositivists, in discussing epistemological questions, would be inclined to reject positivist viewpoint that our statements and theories about social life can be true (though according to modern positivists, we can never know it for sure). They also would reject the positivist distinction between facts and values, which likewise can be considered as epistemological. But the most serious dispute that is taking place in social sciences concerns methodological questions. The author, in analyzing it, pays most attention to two most influential forms of postpositivism, namely to critical theory and postmodernism. Having discussed genealogy and deconstruction which, though with serious reservations, may be considered as postpositivist methods, the author claims that postpositivism lacks the main part of methodology, i.e. rules of accepting scientific statements and theories. And that is why postpositivism can not win the methodological debate over positivism which has such rules.
BASE
Pozityvizmo ir postpozityvizmo ginčas socialiniuose moksluose ; Positivism-postpositivism debat bate in social sciences
The article explores positivism-postpositivism debate in social sciences that has been lasting already for many years. The author does not suppose this debate will end soon since it raises fundamental questions concerning the aims, tasks and methods of social sciences. Though representatives of these sciences differ significantly in views on these questions, the most of them and, in particular, evident majority of representatives of political science virtually holds positivist views. Such questions, which may be called conceptual, are essentially disputable, so they can not be resolved by any empirical research. When examining positivism-postpositivism debate the author singles out, paying tribute to tradition, three aspects of debate: (1) ontological, (2) epistemological, and (3) methodological. Yet he presents the arguments to support his claim that because of its antimetaphysical character positivism can have no ontology at all. Therefore an ontological dispute between positivists and postpositivists is simply impossible. Postpositivists, in discussing epistemological questions, would be inclined to reject positivist viewpoint that our statements and theories about social life can be true (though according to modern positivists, we can never know it for sure). They also would reject the positivist distinction between facts and values, which likewise can be considered as epistemological. But the most serious dispute that is taking place in social sciences concerns methodological questions. The author, in analyzing it, pays most attention to two most influential forms of postpositivism, namely to critical theory and postmodernism. Having discussed genealogy and deconstruction which, though with serious reservations, may be considered as postpositivist methods, the author claims that postpositivism lacks the main part of methodology, i.e. rules of accepting scientific statements and theories. And that is why postpositivism can not win the methodological debate over positivism which has such rules.
BASE