Будущее политической теории: дискуссия о легитимации научного знания на примере гуманистической и постструктуралистской традиции
Article tries to shed light upon the political theory functional contradiction
through the dichotomy of humanistic and post-structuralist tradition. In the nutshell,
there is a question about the status and the process of legitimization of the scientific
knowledge and its corresponding consequences. Several sections of the articles are
dedicated to external and internal aspects of the methodological reflection within political
theory domain. Conclusion is drawn on a possible way of political theory development
in the future.
Upon analyzing the political processes occurring during the nineteenth-twentieth centuries, G.Musikhin posits that the popular idea about the supremacy of professional managers in politics over demagogues speculating with mass’ political aspirations conceals an attempt by the power holders to get rid of the axiological rationale for the political hegemony. He concludes that when the governmental policy is supported by the voters’ will rather than sovereign power per se, the ideological discourse becomes of fundamental importance since support is lent to someone who can present his ideological position as a majority’s goal. The debate within the political space is built around an ability to offer to the society a more attractive political (to be more precise, ideological) prospect rather than detailed mechanisms of how to govern society (that are largely universal).
The article is devoted to the role of the language and education in foundation of humane society. Some methods and approaches offered in the article can help teachers to form positive thinking of their students who are part of humane society.
Assessing the nature, factors and alternatives of contemporary social change is a key challenge for contemporary social science requiring methodological approaches fit to interpret the radical transformations of the institutions and the habitat, of the individual’s mentality and modes of behavior. The way development has been perceived exclusively within the capitalist Western-oriented model is being reconsidered, and the principal methodological approaches of qualitative research in the field are being scrutinized. The critical characteristics of contemporary development are clearly manifested in the political sphere: the emergence of new institutions and new actors transform political spaces and reframe the conventional understanding of politics. The authors test the possibilities of achieving a methodological synthesis in studying political change and propose approaches to overcome the “methodological nationalism” which has so far dominated political science. This revision can be achieved, it is argued, by adequately using the understated cognitive potential of identity studies and by introducing into the research framework, alongside institutions and collective actors, the spatial and the individual, personal dimensions of political development. The edited volume presents the results of the research project funded by the Russian Foundation for the Humanities № 12-03-00306a “The methodology of analyzing political and sociocultural development and forecasting social and political change in the modernization context”.
Collection of studies centered on personalities od the king (later emperor) Frederic III Habsburg (1440-93), his secretary, the humanist Enea Silivio Piccolomini, the future pope Pius II (1458-64), and their mileu.
In this volume, based on a symposium organized by the Aleksanteri Institute, six scholars representing different fields of social research are presenting their points of view on the "Stalinism phenomenon".