首页> 外文期刊>Public choice >John H. Aldrich, James E. Alt, and Arthur Lupia, Positive Changes in Political Science: The Legacy of Richard D. McKelvey's Most Influential Writings
【24h】

John H. Aldrich, James E. Alt, and Arthur Lupia, Positive Changes in Political Science: The Legacy of Richard D. McKelvey's Most Influential Writings

机译:John H. Aldrich,James E. Alt和Arthur Lupia,政治学的积极变化:理查德·麦克凯尔维(Richard D. McKelvey)最有影响力的著作的遗产

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This volume is a festschrift of McKelvey's revolutionary work of positivist analysis in the social sciences. While we are generally skeptical of edited volumes in their ability to successfully maintain continuity throughout the chapters, this one is a clear exception to the rule. We suspect several reasons for this. First, the importance of McKelvey's work as well as those of his students and colleagues (many of whom are featured in this volume) in shaping the positivist movement in Political Science cannot be overestimated. On this point, this volume delivers exceptionally well. Through both his individual as well as collaborative work, McKelvey helped develop and inspire new directions in both formal empirical and theoretical analysis. Some of McKelvey's most influential articles are provided. In addition, no less than twelve of the book's 22 chapters are devoted to offering the reader an impressive and quite detailed account of how McKelvey's work has affected contemporary research and how it will impact future generations of research. What seems to shine through the various chapters of this volume is how the positivist agenda has been pursued for the expressed purpose of making political science analysis relevant to the real world. This reflects the methodological orientation of the volume's muse. McKelvey's scholarly disposition was practical and pragmatic rather than dogmatic. McKelvey, for example, regarded positivist rationality to be methodological rather than ontological (p. 15). In the concluding chapter for example, John Patty and Elizabeth Maggie Penn reveal that McKelvey possessed an open mind with regard to scholarly inquiry. They bring out that McKelvey held the view that "an unproven claim is not necessarily an unfounded one" and that "some of the most interesting research is begun without necessarily having an idea of where it will lead" (p. 490).
机译:这本书是麦克凯尔维(McKelvey)在社会科学中的实证主义分析的革命性著作的纪念节。尽管我们通常对已编辑的卷能否成功维持整个章节的连续性表示怀疑,但这显然是该规则的例外。我们怀疑有几个原因。首先,不能高估麦克凯尔维以及他的学生和同事(本卷中有许多人)在塑造政治学实证主义运动中的重要性。在这一点上,此书量非常出色。通过个人工作和合作工作,McKelvey帮助开发和启发了形式经验和理论分析的新方向。提供了一些麦克凯维最具影响力的文章。此外,本书22章中的至少十二章专门为读者提供了令人印象深刻且非常详尽的说明,其中涉及麦凯维的工作如何影响当代研究以及它将如何影响后代研究。在本书的各个章节中似乎都闪耀着如何实现实证主义议程的明确目的,使政治学分析与现实世界息息相关。这反映了该卷的缪斯的方法论取向。麦凯维的学术风范是务实,务实而不是教条。例如,麦克凯尔维(McKelvey)认为实证主义的理性是方法论的,而不是本体论的(p。15)。例如,在最后一章中,约翰·帕蒂(John Patty)和伊丽莎白·麦琪·佩恩(Elizabeth Maggie Penn)揭示了麦凯维在学术研究方面具有开放的胸怀。他们得出结论,麦克凯尔维(McKelvey)认为“未经证实的主张不一定是毫无根据的主张”,并且“一些最有趣的研究已经开始,而不必知道它将导致什么”(第490页)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号