Pasado y presente de la ciencia política producida en Argentina : apuntes para un debate de su porvenir
The article “Where is Political Science Going?” in which Giovanni Sartori makes a critical balance about the development and results of Political Science new-century, had cause hot arguments. And it adds up to other discussions, that shows their dissatisfied with a narrow and hegemonic definit...
Guardado en:
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Artículo Artículo artículo publishedVersion |
Lenguaje: | Español |
Publicado: |
Facultad de Ciencia Política y Relaciones Internacionales, Universidad Nacional de Rosario
2010
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/2133/1468 http://hdl.handle.net/2133/1468 |
Aporte de: |
Sumario: | The article “Where is Political Science
Going?” in which Giovanni Sartori makes a critical
balance about the development and results of
Political Science new-century, had cause hot arguments.
And it adds up to other discussions, that
shows their dissatisfied with a narrow and hegemonic
definition of what Political Science is.
Basically, those had has arose with the “behavioral
revolution” that grow up in the United States
mid-century, lately spread around several
European countries, and differentially assimilated
in where the discipline get used. Is there any bond
between general and international arguments and
the particular and local strokes of the discipline?
What is going on in Argentina with the narrows
definitions that minimize other ways to make
Political Science –like behavioralism or neoinstitutionalism
perspectives–. This work describes
three fundamental moments of Political Sciences
made in Argentina along the twenty century. The
first one, associates political science with public
right, and shows the struggles to acquire a distinctive
characteristic from de juridical discourse and
the constitutional-legal formalism. The second
moment arise between ´50/´60 decades, and it’s
decisive in the configuration of Political Science
as a modern discipline. Although, the last years of
the ´70 are central for it thematic identity: political
order, the breakdown of democratic regime,
and transitions from authoritarian rule. The thirst
and present moment, is one in where find a
process of institutional building and diversification,
new formative proposals, and efforts to work
among curriculum patterns. In this sense Political
Science and Theory are alive. On the contrary,
they are losing their capacity to discuss and argument
about the construction and change of political
order, the sense in which they group up in the
recent past. |
---|