Wilson's Failure

Roots of Contention about the Meaning of a Science of Politics

Datos Bibliográficos

ID3249769
AutoresPeter N Ubertaccio (Stonehill College), Brian J Cook (0000-0001-7563-7012, Clark University)
Año2006
Volumen100
Número4
Páginas573-578
Fecha de publicación2006-11-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaAmerican Political Science Review (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0003-0554 • E-ISSN: 1537-5943
EditorialCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0003055406062447
OpenAlexW2138223414
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas2
Referencias citadas4

Woodrow Wilson sought to establish a new kind of statesmanship for the American regime and a new science of politics. He intended the latter to support the former, so that the practicing politician and the studious academic would not talk past one another. His efforts to redirect the discipline away from a natural science orthodoxy and subdisciplinary fragmentation were largely ignored during his time because he failed to resolve the core disciplinary tension between political science and political power. Efforts similar to Wilson's have resurfaced periodically as a result, generating an ongoing contentiousness about the character of the discipline. We predict that the struggle over such fundamental matters will continue unabated, for that struggle is rooted in the very object of our studies

Character (mathematics · Discipline · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Fragmentation (computing · Meaning (existential · Orthodoxy · Political science · Politics · Power (physics · Sociology · Theology · Contemporary Sociological Theory and Practice · Law · Philosophy · Political Science Research and Education · Political Theory and Influence