The Art of Comparative Politics. By Ruth Lane. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 1997. 147p. $32.46.

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (1) ◽  
pp. 241-242
Author(s):  
Ronald H. Chilcote
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Scientific Realism ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
History Of ◽  
Peasant Politics ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Development State ◽  
Political Realities ◽  
Concrete Model

In both these short volumes, Ruth Lane assumes an optimis- tic stance, generally within the mainstream of political sci- ence, and attempts to synthesize past and present trends in an effort to show progress. She argues in The Art of Comparative Politics that, despite the disparate approaches, real advances have occurred within the field. Her interpretative essay focuses on the recent history of the field, with an assessment of the behavioral movement during the 1960s and subsequent emphases on development, state, grassroots and peasant politics, and the new institutionalism. In Political Science in Theory and Practice she affirms that a core consensus has appeared in the independent investigations of prominent political scientists. Thus, a coherent working model of polit- ical behavior guides political scientists to understand political realities. She argues that this concrete model coincides with scientific realism and the current understanding of a philos- ophy of science.

The tenure of English judges

1913 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. H. McIlwain
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
General Object ◽  
William Iii ◽  
Science Association

At the meeting of the Political Science Association last year, in the general discussion, on the subject of the recall, I was surprised and I must admit, a little shocked to hear our recall of judges compared to the English removal of judges on address of the houses of parliament.If we must compare unlike things, rather than place the recall beside the theory or the practice of the joint address, I should even prefer to compare it to a bill of attainder.In history, theory and practice the recall as we have it and the English removal by joint address have hardly anything in common, save the same general object.Though I may not (as I do not) believe in the recall of judges, this paper concerns itself not at all with that opinion, but only with the history and nature of the tenure of English judges, particularly as affected by the possibility of removal on address. I believe a study of that history will show that any attempt to force the address into a close resemblance to the recall, whether for the purpose of furthering or of discrediting the latter, is utterly misleading.In the history of the tenure of English judges the act of 12 and 13 William III, subsequently known as the Act of Settlement, is the greatest landmark. The history of the tenure naturally divides into two parts at the year 1711. In dealing with both parts, for the sake of brevity, I shall confine myself strictly to the judges who compose what since 1873 has been known as the supreme court of judicature.

Scientific realism and social science

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell Keat
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Scientific Realism ◽  
Natural Sciences ◽  
Central Issue ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Realist Conception

A central issue in the philosophy of the social sciences is the possibility of naturalism: whether disciplines such as sociology, anthropology, economics and psychology can be ‘scientific’ in broadly the same sense in which this term is applied to physics, chemistry, biology and so on. In the long history of debates about this issue, both naturalists and anti-naturalists have tended to accept a particular view of the natural sciences – the ‘positivist’ conception of science. But the challenges to this previously dominant position in the philosophy of science from around the 1960s made this shared assumption increasingly problematic. It was no longer clear what would be implied by the naturalist requirement that the social sciences should be modelled on the natural sciences. It also became necessary to reconsider the arguments previously employed by anti-naturalists, to see whether these held only on the assumption of a positivist conception of science. If so, a non-positivist naturalism might be defended: a methodological unity of the social and natural sciences based on some alternative to positivism. That this is possible has been argued by scientific realists in the social sciences, drawing on a particular alternative to positivism: the realist conception of science developed in the 1970s by Harré and others.

A Discussion of Alexander Cooley and Jack Snyder's Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool for Global Governance

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 166-167
Author(s):  
Bo Rothstein
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Science Inquiry ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The World ◽  
Contemporary Practice

Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance, edited by Alexander Cooley and Jack Snyder, assembles an impressive group of political scientists to critically discuss “the important analytical, normative, and policy issues associated with the contemporary practice of ‘grading states.’” The volume addresses a topic of importance to a wide range of political scientists in comparative politics, international relations, and political theory, and raises some fundamental questions about the role of political science at the nexus of theory and practice. We have thus invited a number of colleagues to discuss the volume and its broader implications for political science inquiry.

A Discussion of Alexander Cooley and Jack Snyder's Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool for Global Governance

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 168-169
Author(s):  
Philippe C. Schmitter
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Science Inquiry ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The World ◽  
Contemporary Practice

Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance, edited by Alexander Cooley and Jack Snyder, assembles an impressive group of political scientists to critically discuss “the important analytical, normative, and policy issues associated with the contemporary practice of ‘grading states.’” The volume addresses a topic of importance to a wide range of political scientists in comparative politics, international relations, and political theory, and raises some fundamental questions about the role of political science at the nexus of theory and practice. We have thus invited a number of colleagues to discuss the volume and its broader implications for political science inquiry.

A Discussion of Alexander Cooley and Jack Snyder's Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool for Global Governance

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-164
Author(s):  
Milja Kurki
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Science Inquiry ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The World ◽  
Contemporary Practice

Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance, edited by Alexander Cooley and Jack Snyder, assembles an impressive group of political scientists to critically discuss “the important analytical, normative, and policy issues associated with the contemporary practice of ‘grading states.’” The volume addresses a topic of importance to a wide range of political scientists in comparative politics, international relations, and political theory, and raises some fundamental questions about the role of political science at the nexus of theory and practice. We have thus invited a number of colleagues to discuss the volume and its broader implications for political science inquiry.

Soviet Studies, National Security and the Production of “Useful” Knowledge

2010 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 1155-1158
Author(s):  
Stephen E. Hanson
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Political Science ◽  
International Development ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Sociology Of Knowledge ◽  
World War ◽  
Related Area ◽  
Area Studies ◽  
Post World War Ii ◽  
History Of

Know Your Enemy: The Rise and Fall of America's Soviet Experts. By David C. Engerman. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. 480p. $34.95.Know Your Enemy is a sociology of knowledge of the rise of post–World War II Russian and Soviet Studies, written by intellectual historian David C. Engerman. While it is not a work of political science, it offers an important historical analysis of a foundational episode in the history of the political science discipline. It is an account of the evolution of a specific field—Soviet Studies—but it is more than this, because this particular field was at the heart of the development of post–World War II area studies in general, and the intellectual and political engagements linked to the evolution of area studies were crucial to the development of modern political and social science. This symposium thus brings together scholars of Soviet Studies, contemporary post-Soviet Russian politics, comparative politics and international relations more generally, and the history of the discipline, to reflect on this book. While participants were asked to critically evaluate the book's analysis, they were also asked to comment more generally on the rise (and fall?) of area studies, and the history of political science more broadly. The issues raised by the book relate to the history and evolution of the current discipline, but also bear upon its future. For in response to post–Cold War crises (many connected to the discourse of the “war on terror”), there have been new calls for security-related area research made by such institutions as the Department of Defense (the Minerva Program, administered by the National Science Foundation), the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the Department of Education (in connection with Title VI funding of area studies). What does the history of Soviet Studies tell us about these recent developments, and about how individual political scientists and indeed the institutions of professional political science should respond to them?—Jeffrey C. Isaac, Editor

Crises and Sequences in Collective Theory Development

1975 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 979-994 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert T. Holt ◽  
John E. Turner
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Political Development ◽  
Theory Development ◽  
Theoretical Work ◽  
Theory Building ◽  
Reward Structure ◽  
Conceptual Frameworks ◽  
Empirical Generalization ◽  
The 1960S

Since 1954, the Committee on Comparative Politics has provided leadership in the comparative field, and one of its central objectives has been to construct a theory of political development. The books in the series that were published in the 1960s lacked rigorous design, although they did provide data and low-level generalizations which could be used in the theory-building task. This essay focuses primarily on Crises and Sequences in Political Development, which is authored solely by Committee members and reports on the results of their theoretical work thus far. The Committee takes the “intuitive empirical generalization” approach to theory development—in contrast with systematic empirical generalization and the analytic-deductive procedure. It is unlikely, however, that the Committee's approach will lead to the formulation of a coherent set of interrelated propositions within which empirical phenomena can be explained. But the Committee's work is not atypical of the theoretical literature in political science, which reflects the reward structure of the discipline. The building of powerful theories will be facilitated when emphasis is placed on the development of clearly falsifiable propositions rather than on the development of loose conceptual frameworks.

scholarly journals Parliamentary Representation in Modern Britain: Past, Present, and Future

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-29
Author(s):  
Miles Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual History ◽  
Spatial Dimension ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Good Shape ◽  
History Of ◽  
Women In Parliament ◽  
1960S And 1970S ◽  
Parliamentary Procedure ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Modern Era

Abstract A series of recent books all attest to a revival of interest in the theory and practice of parliamentary representation in the modern era as a scholarly discipline. This review surveys eight different aspects of that history since the early nineteenth century: the spatial dimension of the Palace of Westminster; the comparative framework offered by the history of parliaments in Europe; ideas of parliamentary representation; the history of parliamentary procedure; women in parliament; the House of Lords; the history of corruption; and the Brexit crisis. Insights and perspectives are drawn from recent historical research as well as from political science and intellectual history. The review concludes by observing that the history of parliamentary representation in the modern era is in good shape. Some older interpretive paradigms still lurk, especially an obsession with ‘democratization’. However, more is now known about individual MPs and constituencies than ever before. The digitization of the records of parliament is expediting the kind of longitudinal analysis which was impossible back in the 1960s and 1970s. And the intellectual history and public policy literature around the idea of representation is enjoying a renaissance.

scholarly journals Deconstructing the reinvention of operations management

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
James M. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual History ◽  
Operations Management ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Industrial Engineering ◽  
Scientific Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
History Of ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Main Component

Purpose The purpose is to provide an intellectual history of Operations Management, particularly noting recent developments and its underlying continuity with earlier systems and thinking. Operations Management as a discipline identifies its “modern” incarnation as dating from the 1960s when it became more rigorous and managerially focused. This re-invention constructed a “narrative” that the profession still follows, yet a critical perspective reveals significant, though under-appreciated continuity with earlier theory and practice. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents a comprehensive literature review and comparative analysis of historic developments in management and academia. Findings In the early 1900s, F. W. Taylor’s Shop Management established Operation Management, but its main component, Scientific Management, had stagnated by the 1950s. At that point, the rise of Management Science both reinvigorated Operations Management and threatened it with a competing new discipline. To compete Operations Management then modernized by redefining itself, reasserting its interest in several areas and co-opting Operational Research tools for those. It also contracted, withdrawing from areas considered vocational, or more suited to Industrial Engineering. Research limitations/implications This historical overview shows the critical importance of drawing research agenda from practical managerial concerns. Practical implications Practitioners benefit from the intellectual rigor that academics provide and a historical perspective shows that the relationship has been mutually beneficial. Social implications The disciplines of Operations Management, Operations Research and Industrial Engineering are complementary and competitive in addressing many problems that transcend their boundaries, and use common ideas and techniques. The demands of “academic rigor” have had a deleterious effect on the practical managerial relevance of these disciplines. Originality/value A long-term, cross-disciplinary perspective provides a unique understanding of the research interests and practical orientations of these disciplines.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document