政治哲学中的多元主义——评道丁和沃尔什

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Australian Journal of Political Science Pub Date : 2020-09-27 DOI:10.1080/10361146.2020.1822777
Alexandra Oprea
{"title":"政治哲学中的多元主义——评道丁和沃尔什","authors":"Alexandra Oprea","doi":"10.1080/10361146.2020.1822777","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The papers by Keith Dowding and Adrian Walsh debate whether political philosophy belongs within political science or whether it belongs within philosophy. It is my contention that the two contributions largely agree about the descriptive level, but disagree at the prescriptive and potentially at the institutional level. I conclude with a brief argument in favour of a pluralist approach to the big questions in political philosophy. By ‘pluralist approach’, I mean that (i) political philosophers belong in both political science and philosophy departments and that (ii) the intellectual community of political philosophy would be better off if it included representatives and methods from both philosophy and political science.","PeriodicalId":46913,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Political Science","volume":"55 1","pages":"456 - 462"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10361146.2020.1822777","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pluralism in political philosophy: a commentary on Dowding and Walsh\",\"authors\":\"Alexandra Oprea\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10361146.2020.1822777\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The papers by Keith Dowding and Adrian Walsh debate whether political philosophy belongs within political science or whether it belongs within philosophy. It is my contention that the two contributions largely agree about the descriptive level, but disagree at the prescriptive and potentially at the institutional level. I conclude with a brief argument in favour of a pluralist approach to the big questions in political philosophy. By ‘pluralist approach’, I mean that (i) political philosophers belong in both political science and philosophy departments and that (ii) the intellectual community of political philosophy would be better off if it included representatives and methods from both philosophy and political science.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46913,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Political Science\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"456 - 462\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10361146.2020.1822777\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Political Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2020.1822777\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2020.1822777","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要:Keith Dowding和Adrian Walsh的论文就政治哲学是属于政治科学还是属于哲学展开了争论。我认为,这两篇文章在描述层面上基本一致,但在规定层面和潜在的制度层面上存在分歧。最后,我提出了一个简短的论点,支持对政治哲学中的重大问题采取多元方法。所谓“多元方法”,我的意思是:(I)政治哲学家同时属于政治学和哲学系,(ii)如果政治哲学的知识界包括哲学和政治学的代表和方法,那么它会更好。
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
Pluralism in political philosophy: a commentary on Dowding and Walsh
ABSTRACT The papers by Keith Dowding and Adrian Walsh debate whether political philosophy belongs within political science or whether it belongs within philosophy. It is my contention that the two contributions largely agree about the descriptive level, but disagree at the prescriptive and potentially at the institutional level. I conclude with a brief argument in favour of a pluralist approach to the big questions in political philosophy. By ‘pluralist approach’, I mean that (i) political philosophers belong in both political science and philosophy departments and that (ii) the intellectual community of political philosophy would be better off if it included representatives and methods from both philosophy and political science.
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
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Australian Journal of Political Science is the official journal of the Australian Political Studies Association. The editorial team of the Journal includes a range of Australian and overseas specialists covering the major subdisciplines of political science. We publish articles of high quality at the cutting edge of the discipline, characterised by conceptual clarity, methodological rigour, substantive interest, theoretical coherence, broad appeal, originality and insight.
期刊最新文献
Path contingency: advancing a spatial-institutionalist perspective on decision pathways for disaster risk governance ‘The Australian way’: the gendered and racial logics of Scott Morrison’s climate change narratives Religious freedom for whom? How conservative Christianity erodes the religious freedom of those it seeks to discriminate against Free speech, religious freedom and vilification in Australia Bridging the expectation gap: a survey of Australian PhD candidates and supervisors in politics and international relations
×
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