DOCSLIB.ORG

IIVG Papers Veröffentlichungsreihe Des Internationalen Instituts Für

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
IIVG Papers Veröffentlichungsreihe Des Internationalen Instituts Für IIVG Papers Veröffentlichungsreihe des Internationalen Instituts für Vergleichende Gesellschaftsforschung Wissenschaftszentruro Berlin PV/78-2 MAJOR CHANGES IN POLITICAL SCIENCE, 1952 - 1977 by Karl W. Deutsch Harvard University and Science Center Berlin Publication series of the International Institute for Comparative Social Research WissenschaftsZentrum Berlin A version of this paper was presented on October 20, 1977 at the twenty-fifth anniversary meeting of the International Social Science Council in Paris. I would like to thank Wayne Koonce for his valuable assistance in compiling the refer ences. Major Changes in Political Science, 1952-1977 1. Five Traditional Foci of Political Inquiry 1.1 Justice 1.2 Power 1.3 Legitimacy and Stability 1.4 Institutions and Procedures 1.5 Large-Scale Trends 2. Four New Centers of Attention: Cognition, Policy Research, System Performance, and the Interplay between Innovative System Transformation and Identity 2.1 Cognition 2.1.1 Hermeneutics 2.1.2 Critical Cognition of Reality 2.1.3 The Impact of Psychology, Psychiatry and Anthropolog 2.1.4 Logical and Empirical Approaches 2.1.4.1 Uses of Symbolic Logic 2.1.4.2 Empirical Evidence 2.1.4.3 The Behavioral Approach 2.1.5 Probabilistic and Mathematical Model Building 2.2 Policy Research 2.3 System Characteristics: Coherence, Governability, Legitimacy and Governing Capacity 2.3.1 Governmental Capabilities and Performance 2.3.2 Theory of Democracy 2.4 Innovation, Self-Transformation and Identity 3. Changes in Regard to Methods 3.1 Sampling and Survey Research 3.2 Content Analysis 3.3 Aggregate Data and Computer Analysis 4. Conclusions 4.1 New Foci of Interest 4.2 A New Normativism 4.3 A Large Expansion of Cognitive Tasks 4.4 A Challenge of Undercapacity and Overload 1 During the last quarter century, political science has grown a great deal, as have most of the social sciences. It has grown in its numbers of university chairs and- - professional personnel, full-time students and courses of study, learned journals and scholarly books, case studies and comparisons within and across nations. Its subject matter has increased. There are about three times as many legally sovereign states in the wold, and in most of them governments are trying to regulate and govern much larger sections of the lives of their inhabitants. There have been many changes of public policies, of governments, of political regimes, and in several countries of the entire social order. The overview that follows will be. tentative and in­ complete. It will be richer in references to American research and to a lesser extent to research in Germany, Britain, France and Scandanavia. Even though it is true that a large number of the world’s active political scientists are working in these countries, it seems almost certain that this account underrepresents the amount of research done in Japan, the Mediterranean countries, in the developing countries of the Third World of Latin America, Asia and Africa, and in the countries governed by regimes representing the various tendencies of contemporary Marxism and communism. It is to be hoped that in time a more complete and balanced account of the last twenty five years can be put together from the work of political scientists from these various parts of the world. What have we learned form this large expansion of our tasks and resources? Or at least, to what extent and in what directions have our preoccupations changed? The first answers to these questions may best be sought in the substance of our concerns, that is, in the main focus and key problems of our professional concerns. In 2 the work of actual political analysts, several of these concerns of course, will tend to overlap. In what follows, I can list each scholar only provisionally under that one of his several concerns which appears to me the strongest. 1. Five Traditional Foci of Political Enquiry 1.1 Justice. From the days of Solon, Plato and Aristotle through the times of St. Augustine, John of Salisbury, Jean Jacques Rousseau, John Locke and to the present-day concerns of John Rawls,political thinkers have tended to make rational justice the main target of their search. 1) By this they meant either distributive justice, that is giving to each person his or her due, or else what we may call "functional justice," that is allocating to each member of society whatever would be conducive to some commonly accepted overriding goal. What was to be a person's "due" might, of course, change from thinker to thinker and age to age - from the Aristotle's justification of inequality between "natural-born" freeman and "natural-born" slaves to the assertions of equal natural rights by John Locke and Thomas Jefferson. Overriding goals proved no less changeable. For Plato's Republic, the goal was stability and the support of philosophic studies. For Rousseau, it was obedience to the enlightened general will in response to "the logic of things" - la logique des choses; for Lenin it was the pursuit of the revolutionary transformation of society in accordance with the way in which he had understood and developed the doctrines of Karl Marx. Despite the difference of these notions of justice, they were all intended to be rational. They were rational in a formal sense, in that the arguments by which they were proposed were meant to be retraceable, step by step, by every educated and capable reader, who thus should be able to check them for their logic and consistency. And they 3 were to be also substantively rational, in the sense that they were supposed to work when applied in practice under the conditions of time and place which their authors ob­ served or else imagined. 1.2 Power. Though justice has continued as a signifi­ cant concern of political science, it yielded pride of place to the concerns for power and interest, particularly from the 16th century onward, from Nicold:Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes and Alexander Hamilton to Frederick Schuman, Hans Morgenthau, Klaus Knorr, Hermann Kahn, Henry Kissinger, Bernard de Jouvenel, and Gerhart Ritter. These concerns 2) have played an important part in political thought. Power, more precisely defined as the weight of power, is the capacity of an actor, to shift the probability of outcomes in a predictable direction. Traditionally it has been assumed that this direction is predictable by the actor himself, and that it will coincide with what he conceives to be his interest, that is, some outcome he prefers. "Interest" usually means both a subjective concentration of attention and an objective probability of reward or value gain, - for the same actor. The two, attention and reward, are held to coincide normally by many power theorists, although they have often failed to coincide - the supposed "interests" often have turned out to be erroneous - from the days of Machiavelli to the rulers who started World War II. 3) 1.3 Legitimacy and Stability. The stability of a potential system means the probability that, after having been disturbed in some relevant characteristiöS- it will soon return to its state before the disturbance. Legitimacy means that its predominant values have been psychologically internalised by its citizens, and that they can be pursued without intolerable damage to other major values held by them. 4 A third traditional concern of political scientists has been with the legitimacy and stability of states and govern­ ments. Bodin's notion of France as a community of families pointed in this direction, and so did Edmund Burke's ' conservatism and, with a different approach, Friedrich Meineke's treatment of the "Reasons of State". 4) After 1952, some of the work of Seymour Martin Lipset and of Samuel P. Huntington continued and deepened this concern for the legitimacy and stability of governments and political regimes, and for the social conditions favoring these characteristics. 1.4 Institutions and Procedures. Related to this general interest in questions of political legitimacy and stability is the traditional interest of political scientists in the descriptive, historical and analytical study of particular institutions and procedures. From Edmund Burke, James Madison, John Stuart Mill and Woodrow Wilson to the sophisticated reformulations of institutional approaches by Arnold Brecht, Carl J. Friedrich, Zbigniew Brzezinski and Samuel P. Huntington. 6) 1.5 Large-Scale Trends. A fifth traditional interest of political philosophy and political science has been the identification of large-scale trends in history and social development and the alignment of political action in accordance with them. History, in this view, has a re­ cognizable direction, and in the long run politics will have to move along with it. Forerunners of this tradition include Vico, Lessing, and Condorcet. Explicit formulations were developed by Kant, Hegel, Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao Tse-Tung; All these writers believe that they have foreseen at least a part of mankind's future and that they know at least some of the political steps that are to lead to it. ' Other writers take their trends less from history than from what they believe to be biology - and what in fact turns out to be abstracted versions of much of nineteenth 5 century market competition, imperial power politics and arguments in favor of the ruthless exploitation of the weak and poor. Thus Darwin’s work was distorted into "Social Darwinism", and the pitiless nineteenth century tradition stretches from the competition of individuals and families in the thought of Herbert Spencer to the supposed competi­ tion of peoples and races in the murderous ideas and action 8) of Hitler and Mussolini. More complex and sophisticated images of historic trends, based on culture rather than on simplified biology, were developed in the first half of the twentieth century by Vilfredo Pareto, Oswald Spengler, and in a far richer and 9) more humane mood by Max Weber and Arnold Toynbee.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ed 393 216 Author Title Report No Pub Date Available From
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 393 216 EA 027 482 AUTHOR Scribner, Jay D., Ed.; Layton, Donald H., Ed. TITLE The Study of Educational Politics. 1994 Commemorative Yearbook of the Politics of Education Association (1969-1994). Education Policy Perspectives Series. REPORT NO ISBN-0-7507-0419-5 PUB DATE 95 NOTE 225p. AVAILABLE FROM Falmer Press, Taylor & Francis, Inc., 1900 Frost Road, Suite 101, Bristol, PA 19007 (paperback: ISBN-0-7507-0419-5; clothbound: ISBN-0-7507-0418-7). PUB TYPE Books (010) Collected Works General (020) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC09 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Educational Principles; Educational Sociology; Elementary Secondary Education; Feminism; Ideology; International Education; *Policy Analysis; *Policy Formation; Political Influences; *Politics of Education; Role of Education; Values ABSTRACT This book surveys major trends in the politics of education over the last 25 years. Chapters synthesize political and policy developments at local, national, and state levels in the United States, as well as in the international arena. The chapters examine the emerging micropolitics of education and policy-analysis, cultural, and feminist studies. The foreword is by Paul E. Peterson and the introduction by Jay D. Scribner and Donald H.Layton. Chapters include:(1) "Values: The 'What?' of the Politics of Education" (Robert T. Stout, Marilyn Tallerico, and Kent Paredes Scribner) ;(2) "The Politics of Education: From Political Science to Interdisciplinary Inquiry" (Kenneth K. Wong);(3) "The Crucible of Democracy: The Local Arena" (Laurence Iannaccone and Frank W.Lutz); (4) "State Policymaking and School Reform: Influences and Influentials" (Tim L. Mazzoni);(5) "Politics of Education at the Federal Level" (Gerald E. Sroufe) ;(6) "The International Arena: The Global Village" (Frances C.
    [Show full text]
  • FALL 1980 Published Quarterly by the American Political Science Association Volume XIII Number 4 Lbertyckssics
    FALL 1980 Published quarterly by the American Political Science Association Volume XIII Number 4 LbertyCkssics E Pluribus Unum The Formation of the American Republic 1776-1790 By Forrest McDonald Having won their independence from England, ^^ the American colonies faced a new question '£ 'Pluribus ^'""§j| of paramount importance: Would this be politically one nation, or would it not? E Pluribus Unum is a provocative and spirited look at how that question came to be answered. "A fresh, vivid, and penetrating recreation of the crucial fourteen years in which a new nation was born "—New York limes Book Review. "Original and stimulating"—American Historical Review. "Highly readable and highly recommended" —Library Journal. "Will lead scholars to reassess some of their assumptions about the formative years of the American republic. As one of the most sprightly written brief accounts of this turbulent era it is also likely to gain a non-academic audience"—Annals of the American Academy. Hardcover $8.00, Paperback $3.50. We pay postage, but require prepayment, on orders from individuals. Please allow four to six weeks for delivery. To order this book, or for a copy of our catalog, write: LibertyPres.s/LibertyC/as.Hc.s 7440 North Shadeland, Dept. 718 Indianapolis, Indiana 46250 Fall 1980 Published quarterly by the American Political Science Association Volume XIII No. 4 407 PS Editorial Board Editor Chairman Walter E" Beach William S. Livingston Editorial Assistant University of Texas, Austin S. Sue Snook Kathleen Barber John Carroll University F. Chris Garcia University of New Mexico Dorothy Buckton James American University Earl Lewis Trinity University Naomi Lynn Kansas State University Published in February, May, August and November by The American Political Science Association 1 527 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Nlrcv20201.Pdf
    1 2020 Nancy Lipton Rosenblum Senator Joseph S. Clark Professor of Ethics in Politics and Government, Emerita Harvard University Department of Government 1731 Cambridge St. Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138 [email protected] Educational Background B.A., Radcliffe College, Social Studies, 1969 Ph.D., Harvard University Political Science, 1973 Teaching Positions Chair, Department of Government, Harvard University, 2004-2010 Senator Joseph S. Clark Professor of Ethics in Politics and Government, 2001 to 2016 Faculty Fellow, Safra Center for Ethics, Harvard University, 2003-4 Henry Merritt Wriston Professorship, Brown University, 1997- 2001 Chairperson, Political Science Department, Brown University, 1989-95 Professor, Brown University, 1980-2000 Liberal Arts Fellow, Harvard Law School, 1992-93 Fellow, Bunting Institute, Radcliffe College, 1988-89 Visiting Professor, Harvard University, Department of Government, Fall, 1985 Associate Professor, Department of Government, Harvard University, 1977-80 Henry LaBarre Jayne Assistant Professor, Department of Government, Harvard University, 1973-77 Publications Books A Lot of People are Saying: The New Conspiracism and the Assault on Democracy”, with Russell Muirhead (Princeton University Press, 2019) 2 Good Neighbors: The Democracy of Everyday Life in America (Princeton University Press, 2016) On the Side of the Angels: An Appreciation of Parties and Partisanship (Princeton University Press, 2008) Membership and Morals: The Personal Uses of Pluralism in America (Princeton University
    [Show full text]
  • How to Evaluate German Unification?
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Zapf, Wolfgang Working Paper How to evaluate German unification? WZB Discussion Paper, No. FS III 00-404 Provided in Cooperation with: WZB Berlin Social Science Center Suggested Citation: Zapf, Wolfgang (2000) : How to evaluate German unification?, WZB Discussion Paper, No. FS III 00-404, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB), Berlin This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/50191 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise
    [Show full text]
  • Biography of Harold Dwight Lasswell
    NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES H A R O L D D W I G H T L ASS W ELL 1902—1978 A Biographical Memoir by GA BRIEL A. ALMOND Any opinions expressed in this memoir are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences. Biographical Memoir COPYRIGHT 1987 NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES WASHINGTON D.C. HAROLD DWIGHT LASSWELL February 13, 1902-December 18, 1978 BY GABRIEL A. ALMOND AROLD D. LASSWELL ranks among the half dozen cre- Hative innovators in the social sciences in the twentieth century. Few would question that he was the most original and productive political scientist of his time. While still in his twenties and early thirties, he planned and carried out a re- search program demonstrating the importance of personal- ity, social structure, and culture in the explanation of political phenomena. In the course of that work he employed an array of methodologies that included clinical and other kinds of interviewing, content analysis, para-experimental tech- niques, and statistical measurement. It is noteworthy that two decades were to elapse before this kind of research program and methodology became the common property of a disci- pline that until then had been dominated by historical, legal, and philosophical methods. Lasswell was born in 1902 in Donnellson, Illinois (popu- lation ca. 300). His father was a Presbyterian clergyman, his mother, a teacher; an older brother died in childhood. His early family life was spent in small towns in Illinois and In- diana as his father moved from one pulpit to another, and it stressed intellectual and religious values.
    [Show full text]
  • Giving Hands and Feet to Morality
    Perspectives Forum on the Chicago School of Political Science Giving Hands and Feet to Morality By Michael Neblo f you look closely at the stone engraving that names the Social the increasing sense of human dignity on the other, makes possible a Science Research building at the University of Chicago, you far more intelligent form of government than ever before in history.2 Ican see a curious patch after the e in Science. Legend has it the By highlighting their debt to pragmatism and progressivism, I patch covers an s that Robert Maynard Hutchins ordered do not mean to diminish Merriam’s and Lasswell’s accom- stricken; there is only one social science, Hutchins insisted. plishments, but only to situate and explain them in a way con- I do not know whether the legend is true, but it casts in an gruent with these innovators’ original motivations. Merriam interesting light the late Gabriel Almond’s critique of intended the techniques of behavioral political science to aug- Hutchins for “losing” the ment and more fully realize Chicago school of political the aims of “traditional” polit- science.1 Lamenting the loss, Political science did not so much “lose” the ical science—what we would Almond tries to explain the now call political theory. rise of behavioral political sci- Chicago school as walk away from it. Lasswell agreed, noting that ence at Chicago and its subse- the aim of the behavioral sci- quent fall into institutional entist “is nothing less than to give hands and feet to morality.”3 neglect. Ironically, given the topic, he alights on ideographic Lasswell’s protégé, a young Gabriel Almond, went even explanations for both phenomena, locating them in the per- further: sons of Charles Merriam and Hutchins, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Evaluate German Unification? Zapf, Wolfgang
    www.ssoar.info How to evaluate German unification? Zapf, Wolfgang Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Arbeitspapier / working paper Zur Verfügung gestellt in Kooperation mit / provided in cooperation with: SSG Sozialwissenschaften, USB Köln Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Zapf, W. (2000). How to evaluate German unification? (Veröffentlichung / Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, Forschungsschwerpunkt Sozialer Wandel, Institutionen und Vermittlungsprozesse, Abteilung Sozialstruktur und Sozialberichterstattung, 00-404). Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung gGmbH. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-116371 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Deposit-Lizenz (Keine This document is made available under Deposit Licence (No Weiterverbreitung - keine Bearbeitung) zur Verfügung gestellt. Redistribution - no modifications). We grant a non-exclusive, non- Gewährt wird ein nicht exklusives, nicht übertragbares, transferable, individual and limited right to using this document. persönliches und beschränktes Recht auf Nutzung dieses This document is solely intended for your personal, non- Dokuments. Dieses Dokument ist ausschließlich für commercial use. All of the copies of this documents must retain den persönlichen, nicht-kommerziellen Gebrauch bestimmt. all copyright information and other information regarding legal Auf sämtlichen Kopien dieses Dokuments müssen alle protection. You are not allowed to alter this document in any Urheberrechtshinweise und sonstigen Hinweise auf gesetzlichen way, to copy it for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the Schutz beibehalten werden. Sie dürfen dieses Dokument document in public, to perform, distribute or otherwise use the nicht in irgendeiner Weise abändern, noch dürfen Sie document in public. dieses Dokument für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke By using this particular document, you accept the above-stated vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, aufführen, vertreiben oder conditions of use.
    [Show full text]
  • International Governmental Organization Knowledge Management for Multilateral Trade Lawmaking Michael P
    American University International Law Review Volume 15 | Issue 6 Article 6 2000 International Governmental Organization Knowledge Management for Multilateral Trade Lawmaking Michael P. Ryan W. Christopher Lenhardt Katsuya Tamai Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/auilr Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Ryan, Michael P., et al. "International Governmental Organization Knowledge Management for Multilateral Trade Lawmaking." American University International Law Review 15, no. 6 (2000): 1347-1378. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University International Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INTERNATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FOR MULTILATERAL TRADE LAWMAKING MICHAEL P. RYAN' W. CHRISTOPHER LENHARDT*° KATSUYA TAMAI INTRODUCTION ............................................ 1347 I. KNOWLEDGE AND THE FUNCTIONAL THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION ........................................ 1349 II. INTERNATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS AS KNOWLEDGE MANAGERS .... 1356 III. ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT ...................... 1361 IV. INTERNATIONAL GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FOR MULTILATERAL
    [Show full text]
  • M.A POLITICAL SCIENCE SYLLABUS Course at Glance
    M.A POLITICAL SCIENCE SYLLABUS Course at Glance 1St Semester Course No. Title PSC-101 MODERN POLITICAL THEORY PSC-102 POLITICAL IDEOLOGY PSC-103 WESTERN POLITICAL THOUGHT-1 PSC-104 INDIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM PSC-105 INTERNATIONAL POLITICS: THEORY AND DYNAMICS 2nd Semester Course No. Title PSC-201 CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL THEORY: Issues and Debates PSC-202 THEORY OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS PSC-203 WESTERN POLITICAL THOUGHT -II PSC-204 CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL ISSUES IN INDIA PSC-205 FOREIGN POLICY OF MAJOR POWERS 3rd Semester Course No. Title PSC-301 THEORY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PSC-302 THEORY OF POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY PSC-303 INDIAN POLITICAL THOUGHT PSC-304 HUMAN RIGHTS IN INDIA PSC-305 INDIA IN WORLD AFFAIRS 4th Semester Course No. Title PSC-401 CHANGING DIMENSIONS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION IN INDIA PSC-402 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZIATION AND ADMINISTRIATION PSC-403 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY PSC-404 COMPUTER BASICS: THEORY AND PRACTICE Elective CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL THOUGHT PSC-405 (i) 405 (ii) LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN INDIA 405 (iii) ETHICS AND POLITICS 405 (iv) COMPARATIVE FEDERALISM 405 (v) SOCIAL EXCLUSION IN INDIA Courses of Studies for M.A. in Political Science (Under Semester System of Teaching & Examination Effective from the Academic Session 2016-17) SEMESTER-I Course No. PSC-101 MODERN POLITICAL THEORY Unit-I (i) Political Theory- Evolution, The Traditional Approach; Nature and Scope of Traditional Political Theory; Prime Concerns. (ii) Modern Political Theory- Genesis and Evolution; The Modern Behavioural Approach; Nature and Scope of Modern Political Theory; Prime Concerns. Unit-II (i) Political Decision-making Theory of Harold. D. Laswell – The Concept of Politics as the Societal Decision-making Process; Classification of Societal Values; Role of Elites in the Societal Decision-making Process; Effectiveness and Legitimacy of the Societal Decision-making Structure.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Education in the Elementary School: a Decision-Making Rationale
    This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 70-6748 COG AN, John Joseph, 1942- POLITICAL EDUCATION IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: A DECISION-MAKING RATIONALE. The Ohio State U niversity, Ph.D., 1969 Education, theory and practice University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan (£) Copyright by John Joseph Cogan ,1970 POLITICAL EDUCATION IN THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: A DECISION-MAKING RATIONALE DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By John Joseph Cogan, B.S., M.A, ****** The Ohio State University 1969 Approved by College of Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This writer would like to extend hiB appreciation to all who provided guidance and help in any manner during the completion of this study. The writer is indebted immeasurably to his adviser, Professor Raymond H. Muessig, whose patient and continuous counsel made the completion of this study possible. Appreciation is also extended to Professors Robert E. Jewett and Alexander Frazier who served as readers of the dissertation. Finally, the writer is especially grateful to his wife, Norma, and hiB daughter, Susan, whose patience and understanding have been unfailing throughout the course of this study. ii VITA May 30, 19^2 . Born - Youngstown, Ohio 1 9 6 3. B.S., Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 1963-1965.... Elementary Teacher, Columbus Public Schools, Columbus, Ohio I965 ............ M.A., The Ohio State University, ColumbuB, Ohio 1965-1966 .... Graduate Assistant, College of Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1966-1967 .... United States Office of Education Fellow, Washington, D.C. Summer, 1967 . Acting Director, Consortium of Professional Associations for the Study of Special Teacher Improvement Programs (CONPASS), Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • SS 12 Paper V Half 1 Topic 1B
    Systems Analysis of David Easton 1 Development of the General Systems Theory (GST) • In early 20 th century the Systems Theory was first applied in Biology by Ludwig Von Bertallanfy. • Then in 1920s Anthropologists Bronislaw Malinowski ( Argonauts of the Western Pacific ) and Radcliffe Brown ( Andaman Islanders ) used this as a theoretical tool for analyzing the behavioural patterns of the primitive tribes. For them it was more important to find out what part a pattern of behaviour in a given social system played in maintaining the system as a whole, rather than how the system had originated. • Logical Positivists like Moritz Schilick, Rudolf Carnap, Otto Von Newrath, Victor Kraft and Herbert Feigl, who used to consider empirically observable and verifiable knowledge as the only valid knowledge had influenced the writings of Herbert Simon and other contemporary political thinkers. • Linguistic Philosophers like TD Weldon ( Vocabulary of Politics ) had rejected all philosophical findings that were beyond sensory verification as meaningless. • Sociologists Robert K Merton and Talcott Parsons for the first time had adopted the Systems Theory in their work. All these developments in the first half of the 20 th century had impacted on the application of the Systems Theory to the study of Political Science. David Easton, Gabriel Almond, G C Powell, Morton Kaplan, Karl Deutsch and other behaviouralists were the pioneers to adopt the Systems Theory for analyzing political phenomena and developing theories in Political Science during late 1950s and 1960s. What is a ‘system’? • Ludwig Von Bertallanfy: A system is “a set of elements standing in inter-action.” • Hall and Fagan: A system is “a set of objects together with relationships between the objects and between their attributes.” • Colin Cherry: The system is “a whole which is compounded of many parts ..
    [Show full text]
  • Modernization Theory - and the Non-Western World
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Zapf, Wolfgang Working Paper Modernization theory - and the non-western world WZB Discussion Paper, No. P 2004-003 Provided in Cooperation with: WZB Berlin Social Science Center Suggested Citation: Zapf, Wolfgang (2004) : Modernization theory - and the non-western world, WZB Discussion Paper, No. P 2004-003, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB), Berlin This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/50239 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Wolfgang Zapf Modernization Theory – and the Non-Western World* Best.-Nr. P 2004-003 Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB) Juni 2004 Beim Präsidenten Emeriti Projekte * Paper presented to the conference "Comparing Processes of Modernization", University of Potsdam, December 15-21, 2003.
    [Show full text]