Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Half Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- 1 The End of the Baconian Age -- Bacon's Conviction and Bacon's Program -- The 1970s and the Finalization of Science -- The Situation Today -- How Are Things to Proceed? -- Notes -- 2 What Makes Us Feel We Need a Theory of Science? -- A Note on Terminology -- Notes -- 3 The Formation of the Scientific Object -- Notes -- 4 Can Science Reach Truth? -- Notes -- 5 Science and Other Types of Knowledge -- Science and Democracy -- Professionalization and Scientification -- Differences Between Types of Knowledge -- Summary -- Notes -- Bibliography -- 6 Science for War and Peace -- Useful Science -- Historical Change as a Result of the Atomic Bomb? -- Science in Resistance -- The Scientization of War and the Militarization of Science -- War Research as an Institution -- Is a Reversal of the Situation Possible? -- Peace Research -- The Asymmetry of War and Peace -- The Idea of a Peaceful Science -- Notes -- Bibliography -- 7 The Technological Civilization -- The Relation of Man to Himself -- Social Relations -- Technical Civilization and Culture -- Notes -- 8 The Knowledge-Structure of Society -- Conclusion -- Notes -- 9 An End to Progress? -- The End of the Future? -- The Concept of Progress -- Progress in Science -- An End to Progress by Science and Technology? -- Notes -- About the Book and Author -- Index.

Since ages, the topic of climate – in the sense of "usual weather" – has in the western tradition attracted attention as a possible explanatory factor. Climate, and its purported impact on society, is an integrated element in western thinking and perception. In this lecture, the history of ideas about the climatic impact on humans and society, and the emergence of the ideology of climatic determinism are sketched. This ideology favored the perception of westerners being superior to the people in the rest of the world, giving legitimacy to colonialism. In modern time, when natural sciences instituted self-critical processes (repeatability, falsification) and norms (CUDOS @Merton), the traditional host for climate issues, namely geography, lost its grip, and physics took over. This led to a more systematic, critical, and rigorous approach of building and testing hypotheses and concepts. This gain in methodical rigor, however, went along with the loss of understanding that climate is hardly a key explanatory factor for societal differences and developments. Consequently, the large segments of the field tacitly and unknowingly began reviving the abandoned concept of climatic determinism. Climate science finds itself in a "post-normal" condition, which leads to a frequent dominance of political utility over methodical rigor.

Political theorists today are addressing issues of global concern confronting state systems and in so doing are often forced to confront the concept of Homo sapiens as a 'political animal'. Thus theorists considering Aristotle's Politics attempt to transcend his polis-centric focus and make the case that Aristotle offers ways to address these global concerns by focusing on Empire. This article, contra Dietz et al., argues that Aristotle's political science is first and foremost a science of politeia and that this approach to the operation and working of political systems is far superior to recent attempts at regime analysis in comparative politics. Thus Aristotle's mode of examining political systems offers much fruit for those interested in approaching political phenomena with precision and depth as diverse manifestations of the political communities formed by the species Aristotle called the 'political animal'. From this perspective, focusing on the politeia constituting each political community permits an analysis of contemporary transformations of political life without distorting what is being analyzed.

SILENCING SCIENCE -- CONTENTS -- PREFACE -- INTRODUCTION -- CHAPTER 1 STOPPING SCIENCE -- CHAPTER 2 STOPPING THE FLOW OF SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION -- CHAPTER 3 FILLING THE VOID WHEN SCIENCE IS SILENCED -- CHAPTER 4 A CAUTIONARY NOTE -- CHAPTER 5 A FINAL WORD -- ABOUT THE AUTHORS

"'Ich erzähle Ihnen etwas von mir' war ein in der performativen Sozialwissenschaft angesiedeltes Projekt, in dem fünf Künstler/innen, eine von ihnen zugleich Sozialwissenschaftlerin, zusammenarbeiteten. Ziel war es, Einblick in das Leben mit Demenz zu gewinnen und dem häufig stigmatisierenden Umgang mit dieser Erkrankung entgegenzuwirken. Dies erfolgte in zwei Projektteilen: einer qualitativen Forschungsstudie und einer Kunstausstellung. In diesem Beitrag beschäftige ich mich mit Letzterem, und zwar insbesondere mit der Narration und Konstruktion von dreidimensionalen Kollagen und anderen Ausstellungsobjekten gemeinsam mit dementen Menschen. Das Feedback war sehr positiv, auch weil während der Ausstellung in teilweise nicht vorhersehbarer Weise ein Dialog zwischen den Teilnehmenden und dem Publikum initiiert werden konnte: 'Ich erzähle Ihnen etwas von mir' hat nachdrücklich die Potenz performativer Sozialwissenschaft gezeigt, mit sozialwissenschaftlicher Forschung ein breiteres Publikum sowohl intellektuell als auch emotional zu erreichen und zugleich signifikante Beiträge für die Teilnehmenden selbst und die Gruppe, der sie zugehören zu erbringen." (Autorenreferat)

The question of whether or not school makes a difference in preparing students for democratic citizenship has been debated for a long time in political science and curriculum studies. These discussions are mostly based on the results of international surveys measuring students' political attitudes, values and participation. However, we first need to define what kind of prepared citizens are needed. This article takes on the definition issue and presents new perspectives by exploring how teachers in Social Science (Samhällskunskap) and their students in Sweden reason about engagement when they address complex societal issues such as globalisation. Based on interviews with a number of teachers and students I will argue that in order to understand what is going on in school we need to interpret Social Science teaching in terms of first- and second-order concepts, where the second-order concepts could be seen as "how to think like a social scientist". I will make a case that there is a didactic dilemma for teachers trying to educate students who are both trained in disciplinary thinking and leave school as politically engaged. However, this dilemma is not unsolvable and I will hold a position that it might contain answers to some of the questions that political scientists deal with in terms of engagement.

Can epistemologies anchor processes of social inequality? In this paper, we consider how epistemological dominance in science, engineering, and health (SE&H) fields perpetuates disadvantages for students who enter higher education with alternative epistemologies. Drawing on in-depth interviews with Native American students enrolled at two US research universities who adhere to or revere indigenous epistemologies, we find that epistemological dominance in SE&H degree programs disadvantages students through three processes. First, it delegitimizes Native epistemologies and marginalizes and silences students who value them. Second, in the process of imparting these dominant scientific epistemologies, SE&H courses sometimes require students to participate in pedagogical practices that challenge indigenous ways of knowing. Third, students encounter epistemological imperialism: most students in the sample are working to earn SE&H degrees in order to return to tribal communities to "give back," yet, because the US laws regulating the practice of SE&H extend onto tribal lands, students must earn credentials in epistemologies that devalue, delegitimate, and threaten indigenous knowledge ways to practice on tribal lands. We examine how students navigate these experiences, discuss the implications of these findings for SE&H education, and describe how epistemological dominance may serve as a mechanism of inequality reproduction more broadly.

Die Absicht des Beitrags ist es, über die Entwicklung und den Stand der Allgemeinen Bevölkerungsumfrage der Sozialwissenschaften (ALLBUS) zu berichten. Begonnen wird mit einem Resümee des ALLBUS 1980, in dem aufgezeigt wird, wie der ALLBUS genutzt wird. Außerdem wird das den ALLBUS erweiternde Codebuch präsentiert. Am Beispiel der Frage nach dem politischen Interesse werden die Vergleichsdaten und Modifikationen erläutert. Dann wird ein Überblick über den Stand der Arbeiten zum ALLBUS 1982 und der Angebote an die Benutzer gegeben. Schließlich wird die vergleichende Methodenstudie zum ALLBUS 1982 vorgestellt. Es handelt sich dabei um einen Skalenvergleich, bei dem die Frage nach der Vergleichbarkeit von Einstellungsmessungen gestellt wird. Grundlegend für den Untersuchungsansatz ist die Idee, die konventionelle Skalierungsform der Items, eine numerische 7-stufige Kategorialskalierung, durch eine bi-modale Magnitude-Messung derselben Items zu ergänzen. Es wird der Stand des Projekts skizziert. (RW)