当前位置: X-MOL 学术Policy Sciences › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Emancipatory policy sciences or interpretative revisionism: some thoughts on Douglas Torgerson’s The Policy Sciences of Harold Lasswell
Policy Sciences ( IF 3.8 ) Pub Date : 2024-11-21 , DOI: 10.1007/s11077-024-09556-3
Hengameh Saberi

In the Policy Sciences of Harold Lasswell, Douglas Torgerson asks an important question–whether the logic of policy sciences can inspire democratic hope for social betterment. His response is refreshing and psychoanalytically-informed optimism, whereas a jurisprudential detour of the NHS’s legacy as the most important application of policy sciences in another discipline calls for agnosticism. Revisiting the application of policy sciences in international law suggests that the very logic of policy sciences, under the influence of a defective form of naturalism, disables its potential for inclusive democracy.



中文翻译:


解放性政策科学或解释性修正主义:对道格拉斯·托格森 (Douglas Torgerson) 的《哈罗德·拉斯韦尔 (Harold Lasswell) 的政策科学》的一些思考



在哈罗德·拉斯韦尔 (Harold Lasswell) 的政策科学 (Policy Sciences of Harold Lasswell) 中,道格拉斯·托格森 (Douglas Torgerson) 提出了一个重要问题——政策科学的逻辑是否可以激发对社会改善的民主希望。他的回答是令人耳目一新的、基于精神分析的乐观主义,而将 NHS 的遗产作为政策科学在另一个学科中最重要的应用,在法理上绕道而行,这需要不可知论。重新审视政策科学在国际法中的应用表明,政策科学的逻辑本身,在一种有缺陷的自然主义形式的影响下,使其无法实现包容性民主的潜力。

更新日期:2024-11-21
down
wechat
bug