议会审议:对经验、修辞和系统方法的回顾

Q3 Social Sciences Revista de Sociologia e Politica Pub Date : 2019-12-16 DOI:10.1590/1678-987319277207
Carlos Rico Motos
{"title":"议会审议:对经验、修辞和系统方法的回顾","authors":"Carlos Rico Motos","doi":"10.1590/1678-987319277207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Introduction: This essay discusses three different approaches to the study of deliberation in parliaments: empirical, rhetorical and systemic. Materials and Methods: Through a critical review of the scientific literature, this work addresses some conceptual and analytical problems of the empirical-quantitative strategies aimed at measuring parliamentary deliberation, emphasizing the utility of the rhetorical and systemic approaches to grasp the agonist component of parliamentary debates and also their embeddedness within the broader political system. Results: The paper shows that deliberative dynamics within the democratic chambers cannot be reduced to a formal, closed and quantifiable debate. Hence, it proposes an alternative model for the analysis of deliberative processes in this institution. Discussion: The heterogeneous nature of parliaments recommends studying the deliberative phenomenon in different moments and instances, which includes formal debates, closed door meetings and even informal exchanges outside the plenary and committees. This view challenges the dominance of the empirical-quantitative framing of parliamentary deliberation in the scientific literature and supports a more holistic research strategy based on the combination of the empirical, rhetorical and systemic approaches.","PeriodicalId":35300,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Sociologia e Politica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deliberation in parliaments: a review of the empirical, rhetorical and systemic approaches\",\"authors\":\"Carlos Rico Motos\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/1678-987319277207\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Introduction: This essay discusses three different approaches to the study of deliberation in parliaments: empirical, rhetorical and systemic. Materials and Methods: Through a critical review of the scientific literature, this work addresses some conceptual and analytical problems of the empirical-quantitative strategies aimed at measuring parliamentary deliberation, emphasizing the utility of the rhetorical and systemic approaches to grasp the agonist component of parliamentary debates and also their embeddedness within the broader political system. Results: The paper shows that deliberative dynamics within the democratic chambers cannot be reduced to a formal, closed and quantifiable debate. Hence, it proposes an alternative model for the analysis of deliberative processes in this institution. Discussion: The heterogeneous nature of parliaments recommends studying the deliberative phenomenon in different moments and instances, which includes formal debates, closed door meetings and even informal exchanges outside the plenary and committees. This view challenges the dominance of the empirical-quantitative framing of parliamentary deliberation in the scientific literature and supports a more holistic research strategy based on the combination of the empirical, rhetorical and systemic approaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista de Sociologia e Politica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista de Sociologia e Politica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-987319277207\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Sociologia e Politica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-987319277207","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:本文讨论了研究议会审议的三种不同方法:经验、修辞和系统。材料和方法:通过对科学文献的批判性回顾,本工作解决了旨在衡量议会审议的经验定量策略的一些概念和分析问题,强调了修辞和系统方法的效用,以掌握议会辩论的竞争成分,以及它们在更广泛的政治体系中的嵌入性。结果:本文表明,民主议院内部的审议动态不能简化为正式的、封闭的和可量化的辩论。因此,它提出了分析该机构审议过程的另一种模型。讨论:议会的异质性建议研究不同时刻和情况下的审议现象,包括正式辩论,闭门会议,甚至全体会议和委员会以外的非正式交流。这一观点挑战了科学文献中议会审议的经验定量框架的主导地位,并支持基于经验、修辞和系统方法相结合的更全面的研究策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Deliberation in parliaments: a review of the empirical, rhetorical and systemic approaches
ABSTRACT Introduction: This essay discusses three different approaches to the study of deliberation in parliaments: empirical, rhetorical and systemic. Materials and Methods: Through a critical review of the scientific literature, this work addresses some conceptual and analytical problems of the empirical-quantitative strategies aimed at measuring parliamentary deliberation, emphasizing the utility of the rhetorical and systemic approaches to grasp the agonist component of parliamentary debates and also their embeddedness within the broader political system. Results: The paper shows that deliberative dynamics within the democratic chambers cannot be reduced to a formal, closed and quantifiable debate. Hence, it proposes an alternative model for the analysis of deliberative processes in this institution. Discussion: The heterogeneous nature of parliaments recommends studying the deliberative phenomenon in different moments and instances, which includes formal debates, closed door meetings and even informal exchanges outside the plenary and committees. This view challenges the dominance of the empirical-quantitative framing of parliamentary deliberation in the scientific literature and supports a more holistic research strategy based on the combination of the empirical, rhetorical and systemic approaches.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Revista de Sociologia e Politica
Revista de Sociologia e Politica Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The Revista de Sociologia e Política is a bi-annual publication of the Political Science staff of the Departament of Social Sciences of the Paraná Federal University, in Brazil. Created in 1993, it appears in the months of June and November. Open to scientific debate, the Revista de Sociologia e Política intends to be a pluralist space to divulge the results of substantive research, mainly of sociologists and political scientists. It publishes, preferably in Portuguese, original articles and critical reviews of recently edited works. The Revista de Sociologia e Política give priority to manuscripts whose main theme pertains to politics and the political.
期刊最新文献
Perfil dos conservadores e dos progressistas brasileiros: uma abordagem baseada na teoria dos valores humanos Reavaliando a contribuição do “Paradoxo” de Condorcet para a moderna análise da política A política externa brasileira a partir da imprensa: um estudo exploratório sobre o enquadramento dos principais jornais brasileiros Leyes electorales y diversidad de atributos sociodemográficos de los legisladores: Chile, 2013-2017 Nem formal, nem informal: a diversidade das práticas nas organizações partidárias brasileiras
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1