Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T22:49:43.521Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Power, politics, and the development of political science in the Americas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2021

Thibaud Boncourt Open the ORCID record for Thibaud Boncourt [Opens in a new window]  and
Paulo Ravecca Open the ORCID record for Paulo Ravecca [Opens in a new window]
Thibaud Boncourt
Affiliation:
Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne E-mail: [email protected]
Paulo Ravecca
Affiliation:
Universidad de la República E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Keywords

History of political sciencePolitical science and politicsKnowledge and powerSociology of the social sciencesNorth AmericaSouth America
Type
Introduction
Information
Science in Context , Volume 33 , Issue 2: Power, Politics, and the Development of Political Science in the Americas , June 2020 , pp. 95 - 100
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler-Nissen, Rebecca, and Kristoffer, Kropp. 2015. “A Sociology of Knowledge Approach to European Integration: Four Analytical Principles.” Journal of European Integration 37 (2):155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrin, Philippe. 2010. “L’invention de l’opinion publique européenne. Genèse intellectuelle et politique de l’Eurobaromètre (1950-1973).” Politix 89:79–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amadae, S. M. 2016. Prisoners of Reason: Game Theory and Neoliberal Political Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.Google Scholar
Amadae, S. M. 2003. Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bloor, David. 1991. Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Boncourt, Thibaud. 2015. “The Transnational Circulation of Scientific Ideas: Importing Behaviouralism in European Political Science (1950–1970).” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 51 (2):195–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boncourt, Thibaud. 2019. “Have European social sciences helped to create Europe? The European University Institute, behaviouralism, and the legitimising of European integration.” Revue française de science politique 69 (1):47–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boncourt, Thibaud, Engeli, Isabelle, and Garzia, Diego. 2020. “Fifty Years of Political Science in Europe: An Introduction”. In Political Science in Europe. Achievements, Challenges, Prospects, edited by Thibaud Boncourt, Isabelle Engeli, and Diego Garzia, 3–18. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1993. The field of cultural production. Cambridge UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2001. Science de la science et réflexivité, cours du collège de France. Paris: Raisons d’Agir.Google Scholar
Brettschneider, Marla. 1997. The Family Flamboyant: Race Politics, Queer Families, Jewish Lives. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Brettschneider, Marla. 2011. “Heterosexual Political Science.” PS: Political Science & Politics 44 (01):23–26.Google Scholar
Breuning, Marijke, and Kathryn, Sanders. 2007. “Gender and Journal Authorship in Eight Prestigious Political Science Journals.” PS: Political Science & Politics 40 (02):347–351.Google Scholar
Brown, Wendy. 2002. “At the Edge.” Political Theory 30 (4):556–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Wendy. 2011. “La teoría política no es un lujo: Una respuesta a ‘La teoría política como profesión’ de Timothy Kaufman-Osborn.” Crítica Contemporánea. Revista de Teoría Politica 1:1–9.Google Scholar
Camic, Charles, and Neil, Gross. 2001. “The New Sociology of Ideas.” In The Blackwell Companion to Sociology, edited by Judith, R. Blau, 236–249. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Camic, Charles, Gross, Neil, and Lamont, Michèle. 2011. “Introduction: The Study of Social Knowledge Making.” In Social Knowledge in the Making, edited by Charles Camic, Neil Gross and Michèle Lamont, 1–40. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chwieroth, Jeffrey M. 2010. Capital Ideas. The IMF and the Rise of Financial Liberalization. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cigales, Marcelo. 2017. “Historia de la ciencia política en América Latina: Uma entrevista con Pablo Bulcourf.” REALIS 7 (01):234–257.Google Scholar
Denzin, Norman K. and Lincoln, Yvonna S., eds. Manual de investigación cualitativa. Vol. I: El campo de la investigación cualitativa. Barcelona: Ed. Gedisa Google Scholar
Engeli, Isabelle and Mügge, Liza. 2020. “Patterns of Gender Inequality in European Political Science.” In Political Science in Europe. Achievements, Challenges, Prospects, edited by Boncourt, Thibaud, Engeli, Isabelle, and Garzia, Diego, 179–198. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.Google Scholar
Erickson, Paul, Klein, Judy L., Daston, Lorraine, Lemov, Rebecca M., Sturm, Thomas, and Gordin, Michael D.. 2013. How Reason Almost Lost its Mind: The Strange Career of Cold War Rationality. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Heather K., and Moulder, Ashley. 2011. “Reflecting on a Decade of Women’s Publications in Four Top Political Science Journals.” PS: Political Science & Politics 44 (04):793–798.Google Scholar
Favell, Adrien, and Virginie, Guiraudon. 2009. “The Sociology of the European Union: An Agenda.” European Union Politics 10 (4):550–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flick, Uwe. 2007. Introducción a la investigación cualitativa. Madrid: Ed. Morata y Paideia.Google Scholar
Fourcade, Marion. 2009. Economists and Societies: Discipline and Profession in the United States, Britain and France, 1890s-1990s. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Donald, and Shapiro, Ian. 1996. “Pathologies Revisited: Reflections on our Critics.” In The Rational Choice Controversy, edited by Friedman, Jeffrey, 235–276. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Guilhot, Nicolas. 2005. The Democracy Makers: Human Rights and International Order. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilhot, Nicolas, ed. 2011. The Invention of International Relations Theory: Realism, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the 1954 Conference on Theory. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Gunnell, John. 2004. Imagining the American Polity: Political Science and the Discourse of Democracy. State College: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Hauptmann, Emily. 2012. “The Ford Foundation and the Rise of Behavioralism in Political Science.” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 48 (2):154–173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heilbron, Johan, Sora, Gustavo, and Boncourt, Thibaud, eds. 2018. The Social and Human Sciences in Global Power Relations. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, Gad. 1977. Basic and Surplus Repression in Psychoanalytic Theory: Freud, Reich and Marcuse. Toronto: Toronto University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, Patrick T. 2011. The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations: Philosophy of Science and its Implications for the Study of World Politics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kasza, Gregory J. 2005. “Methodological Bias in the American Journal of Political Science.” In Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in Political Science, edited by Kristen Renwick Monroe, 343-353. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Schlozman, Kay Lehman, and Nie, Norman. 2009. The Future of Political Science: 100 Perspectives. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
L’Estoile, Benoit de. 2007. “Internationalisation and ‘Scientific Nationalism’: The International Institute of African Languages and Cultures between the Wars.” In Ordering Africa: Anthropology, European Imperialism and Disciplinary Development, edited by Tilley, Helen and Gordon, Robert, 95–116. Manchester: University of Manchester Press.Google Scholar
Lagroye, Jacques. 2003. “Les processus de politisation.” In La politisation, edited by Lagroye, Jacques, 359–372. Paris: Belin.Google Scholar
Laitin, David. 2004. “¿Adónde va la ciencia política? Reflexiones sobre la afirmación del profesor Sartori de que “la ciencia política estadounidense no va a ningún lado”.” Política y gobierno 11 (2):361–367. 3Google Scholar
Leiras, Marcelo, and Martin, D’Alessandro. 2005. “La ciencia política en Argentina: El camino de la institucionalización dentro y fuera de las aulas universitarias.” Revista de Ciencia Política (Santiago) 25 (1):76–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcuse, Herbert. 1974. Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Marcuse, Herbert. 1991. One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Maton, Karl. 2005. “A question of autonomy: Bourdieu’s field approach and higher education policy.” Journal of Education Policy 20 (6):687–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merton, Robert . ed. 1973. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mespoulet, Martine. 2007. “La ‘renaissance’ de la sociologie en URSS (1958-1972).” Revue d’Histoire des Sciences Humaine 16:57–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monroe, Kristen Renwick, ed. 2005. Perestroika! The Raucous Revolution in Political Science. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Mudge, Stephanie, and Antoine, Vauchez. 2012. “Building Europe on a Weak Field: Law, Economics, and Scholarly Avatars in Transnational Politics.” American Journal of Sociology 118 (2):449–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oren, Ido. 2003. Our Enemies and Us: America’s Rivalries and the Making of Political Science. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Paternotte, David, and Verloo, Mieke. 2020. “Political Science at Risk in Europe: Frailness and the Study of Power.” In Political Science in Europe. Achievements, Challenges, Prospects, edited by Boncourt, Thibaud, Engeli, Isabelle, and Garzia, Diego, 287–310. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.Google Scholar
Pion-Berlin, David, and Dan, Clearly. 2005. “Methodological Bias in the APSR.” In Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in Political Science, edited by Kristen Renwick Monroe, 305–329. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ravecca, Paulo. 2015. “Our Discipline and its Politics: Authoritarian Political Science: Chile 1979-1989.” Revista de Ciencia Política 35 (1):145–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravecca, Paulo. 2016. “The Comparative Politics of Political Science: Chile and Uruguay in Authoritarian Times.” Revista Andina de Estudios Políticos 6 (1):4–17.Google Scholar
Ravecca, Paulo. 2019. The Politics of Political Science: Rewriting Latin American Experiences. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roa-Bastos, Francisco, and Vauchez, Antoine, eds. 2019. “European Archive: Towards a Renewed Sociohistory of European Forms of Knowledge.” Revue française de science politique 69 (1): 7–156.Google Scholar
Rocha, Carpiuc, Cecilia. 2016. “Women and Diversity in Latin American Political Science.” European Political Science 15 (4):457–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosamond, Ben. 2000. Theories of European Integration. Houndmills: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Rosamond, Ben. 2015. “Field of Dreams: The Discursive Construction of EU Studies, Intellectual Dissidence and the Practice of ‘Normal Science’.” Journal of Common Market Studies 54 (1):19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudolph, Susanne Hoeber. 2005. “Perestroika and its Other.” In Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in Political Science, edited by Kristen Renwick Monroe, 12-20. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Solovey, Mark. 2012. “Cold War Social Science: Specter, Reality, or Useful Concept?” In Cold War Social Science: Knowledge Production, Liberal Democracy and Human Nature, edited by Solovey, Mark and Cravens, Hamilton, 1–22. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinmetz, George. 2013. “A Child of the Empire: British Sociology and Colonialism, 1940s–1960s.” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 49 (4):353–378.Google ScholarPubMed
Trent, John. E. 2009. “Political Science 2010: Out of Step with the World? Empirical evidence and Commentary.” 21st World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Santiago, Chile. http://www.johntrent.ca/published-writings/IPSAIsPolSci-0709.html Google Scholar
Trent, John E. 2010. “Should Political Science Be More Relevant? An Empirical and Critical Analysis of the Discipline.” European Political Science 10 (2):191–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trent, John E. 2012. “Issues and Trends in Political Science at the Beginning of the 21st Century. Perspectives from the World of Political Science Book Series.” In The World of Political Science. A Critical Overview of the Development of Political Studies around the Globe: 1990-2012, edited by John, E. Trent & Michael, B. Stein, 91–153. Berlin/Toronto: Barbara Budrich Publishers.Google Scholar
Trent, John E. 2014. “The State of Political Studies in the World: Thinking about New Paradigms.” 23rd World Congress of the International Political Science Association, Montreal, Canada. http://johntrent.ca/published-writings/ThinkNewParadigm.html Google Scholar
Vauchez, Antoine. 2008. “The Force of a Weak Field: Law and Lawyers in the Government of the European Union.” International Political Sociology 20 (2):128–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitley, Richard. 2000. The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar