000			01650nam a2200193Ia 4500
999			_c12038 _d12038
005			20220302180409.0
008			200202s9999 xx 000 0 und d
020			_a684414759
082			_a320 WAS
100			_aWasby, Stephen L
245		0	_aPolitical science the discipline and its dimensions : an introduction
260			_aCalcutta
260			_bScientific Book Agency
260			_c1970
300			_a586 p.
520			_aDiscussions of political science, its boundaries, limitations, and future, abound, As political science can be defined in terms of what political scientists do, historical surveys and surveys of what they are doing (like the UNESCO and Robson works) become relevant. Discussions, like the volumes by Dahl, Hacker, and Meehan, of how to analyze politics also help provide definitions of political science. Others con- centrate on the emphasis or outputs of the discipline; for example, Easton urges that <we move away from historicism and toward theory-building. Attacks on current de- velopments in approach and urgings that we hold fast to old ways, for example, the Vogelin volume, parts of Crick's argument, and the Moore article, help make clear by way of contrast what the discipline contains, as do complaints about shifts in subject matter, like Cobban's article. The ruminations of Presidents of the American Political Science Association, two of which, by Redford and Truman, are noted, often deal with the content of political science. Eulau's article is a survey of ap- proaches in the discipline; Young's collection has the same purpose.
650			_aPolitical Science
942			_cB _2ddc