Reviews for Moral Teachings Of Science (1892)

The average rating for Moral Teachings Of Science (1892) based on 2 reviews is 3 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2015-11-15 00:00:00 Felix Anstirman In 1996, Oxford University Press published "A New Handbook of Political Science," edited by Robert Goodin and Hans-Dieter Klingemann. This volume is the successor of that work, valuable on its own merits. A disciplinary handbook should give readers a sense of research and theory in the various areas of that discipline. First, the structure of the volume: there is a leisurely and solid introduction to the volume by Goodin; the second section features a major area within political science--political theory; Part III explores political institutions; Part IV examines law and politics; Part V examines political behavior; Part VI considers a rather exotic aspect of political science--contextual political analysis (not a standard field of the discipline, but an arena worth looking at); Part VII focuses on comparative politics; Part VIII features international relations; Part IX looks at political economy; Part X considers public policy; Part XI elaborates upon political methodology. There are a series of useful appendices to close out the volume. The book closes out on page 1186. This book is not a quick read. It is meant as a handbook, a guide for professionals in the area. Some of the chapters would be tough going for a more general audience. For graduate students in political science and for professionals in the area, this provides an overall perspective on the contours of the discipline.

Review # 2 was written on 2016-11-16 00:00:00 Roy Corson I read 1291 pages of political science and I’m not sure why. One reason for doing so was to learn more about politics, but that turned out to be largely a misapprehension on my part. Political science primarily attempts to theorise politics, to capture it in concepts and explain it through the proposed theory and concepts, rather than use the quick and dirty tools of common sense and intuition (folk politology, if you will). Theory in this sense is a good thing, as it provides clarity and analytical rigour, but in the enormously complex system known as politics theory is understandably not (yet) very successful in explaining things. At least not as good as folk politology can be. The emphasis on theory means that a very large portion of the handbook is dedicated to metatheoretical debates, arguing which theoretical framework does a better job, rather than actual successful application of theory into practice. That can become quite stale after a while (coming from a philosopher!) and often makes for banal conclusions (again, coming from a philosopher!), e.g. when the importance of history, context, ideas, institutions, etc. is repeated every other article. But of course, that is the burden a handbook for the general study of politics must carry. I nevertheless found much of use and inspiration. If not for practical understanding, at least for the concepts and diversity of theories. I also gained a good insight into the lay of the political-science land: how it is done, the different vistas of research, and what to expect from them. I also more deeply understand the inescapability (and desirability) of normative arguments, especially in the areas of international relations and public policy (political theory goes without saying). Lastly, I should say the book is relatively tough going in some parts for the uninitiated, but that was to be expected. In sum, a good compendium relaying the state of the art if you know what you’re getting yourself into.