Suchergebnisse

The thesis of this article is that logic/science does not exclude but requires knowledge of rhetoric. Rhetoric is not merely a technique for persuasion but, more importantly, a science of how we structure our knowledge through language. Logic & science are nothing but instruments that natural language constructs to handle observable factual circumstances, something that became possible with the invention of the alphabet & written language. A positivistic, reductive science is suitable only by research on given facts. Alongside the knowledge of facts, we must also handle the knowledge of action, which is impossible to do only with the positivistic methods of conventional social science. Drawing on his personal experiences of municipal politics & communal planning the author suggests that rhetorical conceptions & methods of research can play a big role in community planning research & in sciences of man, which necessarily brings facts & actions together. The article refers to a rhetorical based theory called 'human-scientific theory of action.' While science helps us to know (knowledge of causes), rhetoric helps us to understand (knowledge of intentions & meanings). 40 References. Adapted from the source document.

The teaching staff in Lund, having reviewed the above-stated guidelines developed in Goteborg, couldn't adopt the guidelines without further discussion. Among their concerns were the requirement that all articles be written in the same language, rather than permitting (as an example) a mix of Swedish and English articles, and the lack of any requirement that the articles be accepted for publication. They furthermore concluded that the development of guidelines could benefit from national oversight on the part of an organization such as the Statsvetenskapliga Forbundet. They also stated that data should be gathered on practices among faculty at institutions other than the one at Goteborg. Other potential pitfalls raised include the danger that articles either won't come together and fit as a whole or between them will serve to repeat the same argument. The author states his personal concern that criteria concerning what is expected of a doctoral candidate will be based on his compilation thesis rather than the other way around. Finally, the author raises the question as to why one should write a compilation thesis at all and under what circumstances it is to be preferred over a monograph. Any guidelines developed should not only aid in guarding against the above-mentioned pitfalls but should also include positive examples of what constitutes. Adapted from the source document.