Argument: Political Opportunities and Muslim Strategies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walid Jumblatt Abdullah
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Political Opportunities ◽  
Way Of Thinking ◽  
Agent Structure ◽  
Structure Debate

This chapter lays out my argument. Firstly, I define and problematize the contentious categories used in the book: ulama, liberals, and conservatives. Subsequently, I delve into the agent-structure debate that pervades much of political science, and postulate a way of thinking of the problem, and then apply it to Muslim activists in Singapore. This is done through an application of the concept of political opportunities. The argument is explicated in detail.

scholarly journals State, law, realm of freedom (practical-philosophical themes of the later Fichte)

2003 ◽  
pp. 33-59
Author(s):  
Danilo Basta
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
Practical Philosophy ◽  
State Law ◽  
Philosophical Consideration ◽  
Way Of Thinking ◽  
The Way

Fichte's theory of the state, comprising and integral part of his practical philosophy, is built on the key premises of his metaphysics. Therefore the clarification of this problem in Fichte's later philosophy intends to point, on one hand, to a representative metaphysical project of the state with great speculative power, and on the other to a way of thinking about the state which is today taken to be anachronistic, unscientific, outdated, and hence worthy of being mentioned as a "negative example". Though these qualifications should not be totally discarded or questioned in advance, revisiting Fichte's late metaphysics of the state is philosophically productive even in our times. Nowadays it can be extremely helpful to anyone who has not yet been trodden over by a scientific political science and whose cognitive interest is still sufficiently open for a strongly philosophical consideration of the state, who wishes to philosophically enrich or sharpens his/her view of the state. Although Fichte's theory of the state is unified and coherent, it underwent - especially in its last phase - a significant transformation. It was so much visible that the state is relegated to the background even terminologically. In Fichte's later philosophy the keyword is no longer the state but the "realm of freedom". The state is here talked about intentionally, as it were, always with a glance aimed at this realm, at the possibility and prospects for its establishment. Although this terminological and cognitive primacy of the realm of freedom pushed the state into the background, it was not denied any importance. On the contrary, on the way to freedom the state is for Fichte an important point of development that must be passed. And precisely in this transiency lies its inevitability. .

The Art of Political Science: Spatial Diagrams as Iconic and Revelatory

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 311-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry E. Brady
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Agenda Setting ◽  
Political Competition ◽  
Supply And Demand ◽  
Party Systems ◽  
Voting Systems ◽  
Demand Curves ◽  
The World ◽  
Way Of Thinking ◽  
Better Than

Spatial diagrams of politics could and should be iconic for political science in much the same way as supply-and-demand curves are in economics. Many fundamental problems of political science can be connected with them, and many different concepts—such as ideological constraint, cross-pressures, framing, agenda-setting, political competition, voting systems, and party systems, to name just a few—can be illuminated through spatial diagrams. Spatial diagrams raise questions and provide insights. They suggest political maneuvers, possible realignments, and political problems. They provide us with revealing images that aid memory and facilitate analysis. They are a powerful way to think about politics, and we could not do better than to feature them in our textbooks, to use them in our research, and to exhibit them as our brand—as our distinctive way of thinking about how the world works

Reciprocity, hierarchy, and obligation in world politics: From Kula to Potlatch

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
John G Oates ◽  
Eric Grynaviski
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Social Norms ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Social Order ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Hierarchical Relations ◽  
The Gift ◽  
Generative Structure ◽  
Agent Structure ◽  
Structure Debate

The observation that agents and structures are co-constituted is now commonplace, yet scholars continue to struggle to incorporate this insight. Rationalists tend to overemphasize actors’ agency in the constitution of social order while constructivists tend to overstate the degree to which structures determine action. This article uses The Gift to rethink the agent–structure debate, arguing that the model of social relations Mauss outlines in this work sheds new light on basic concepts in international relations theory such as reciprocity, hierarchy, and obligation. Mauss’ social theory locates the generative structure of social order in diffuse exchange relations, what he terms gift exchange, and assumes that actors are both socially positioned within hierarchical relations of exchange and reflexive agents who are able to understand and strive to change those relations. In so doing, he avoids reducing social order to either deeply internalized social norms or instrumental interests, navigating between agents and structures to develop a more dynamic model of social relations. This model of social order permits a richer understanding of hierarchy in world politics that appreciates the experience of domination and the possibility of resistance. It also provides a distinct understanding of the nature of social obligation and the “compliance pull” of social norms, locating their force in the reflexive recognition by actors that they are dependent on shared social relations for meaningful social agency. This points toward an ethics of stewardship that opens up new perspectives on the duties that states and others owe to each other, a duty grounded in an acknowledgment of our mutual vulnerability as socially constituted agents.

The Agent–Structure Debate and America's Vietnam Options: A Reply to Professor Gavan Duffy

2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuen Foong Khong
Keyword(s):  
Personality Variables ◽  
Agent Structure ◽  
Structure Debate

This article responds to Gavan Duffy's critique of Analogies at War in his recent essay on the agent-structure debate in the JJPS (2001, 2: 161–175). I argue that Duffy's use of Analogies at War to pursue his thesis about “giving structure its due” is flawed because he (1) fails to assess the book in terms of the outcomes it seeks to explain; (2) conflates “structure” with process, perceptual, and personality variables; (3) misinterprets my assumptions while neglecting the findings of recent works that corroborate the findings of Analogies at War; and (4) fails to demonstrate one of his key suggestions, i.e. the importance of showing how agents and structures are mutually constitutive. The article concludes by discussing some pointers raised by the exchange for furthering the agent-structure debate.

scholarly journals Politics and Political Science

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Jervis
Keyword(s):  
Political Psychology ◽  
National Security ◽  
Political Science ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Strategic Interaction ◽  
Professional Expertise ◽  
Security Dilemma ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Way Of Thinking ◽  
Politics And Political Science

Throughout my life, politics and political science have been intertwined. I handed out leaflets for Adlai Stevenson at age 12, participated in protests at Oberlin and Berkeley, and, as I developed professional expertise, worked with national security agencies. Conflict has been a continuing interest, particularly whether situations are best analyzed as a security dilemma or aggression. In exploring this question, I was drawn into both political psychology and signaling, although the two are very different. I have continued to work on each and occasionally try to bring them together. My thinking about strategic interaction led to a book-length exploration of system effects, a way of thinking that I believe is still insufficiently appreciated in the discipline and among policy makers. My research continues to be stimulated by both developments in the discipline and unfolding international politics.

What's at stake in the agent-structure debate?

1989 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Dessler
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Scientific Realism ◽  
International System ◽  
State Action ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Structure Problem ◽  
International Structure ◽  
Structural Research ◽  
Agent Structure ◽  
Structure Debate

Recent developments in the philosophy of science, particularly those falling under the rubric of “scientific realism,” have earned growing recognition among theorists of international relations but have failed to generate substantive programs of research. Consequently, the empirical relevance of much philosophical discourse, such as that centering on the agent-structure problem in social theory, remains unestablished. This article attempts to bridge the gap between the philosophy and practice of science by outlining a model of international structure based on the principles of scientific realism and by considering its implications for a structural research program in international relations theory. Appealing to Imre Lakatos's methodology of theorychoice, the article presents an ontological case for adopting a “transformational” model of structure over the “positional” model developed in the work of Kenneth Waltz. The article demonstrates that the positional approach offers no conceptual or explanatory hold on those features of the international structure that are the intended products of state action. In conclusion, the article argues that the stakes in the agent-structure debate include the capacity to generate integrative structural theory and the ability to theorize the possibilities for peaceful change in the international system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document