Sentences with phrase «political science in particular»

Not exact matches

See, for example, the particular data of Herbert McCloskey, «Consensus and Ideology in American Politics,» American Political Science Review, 58 June.964), pp. 361 - 382.

«Whether this sort of harassment should be countenanced is not about any particular political or special - interest groups; instead, it is a fundamental question about whether anyone can use (or, rather, misuse) public record laws to stifle science,» the legal defense fund said in the amicus brief.

«[I] n spite of his personal political commitment to openness,» the reviewers write, «Delfanti elegantly dismisses dominant narratives that portray open science (in particular, open biology) as an up - to - date version of the traditional Mertonian norms now endangered by corporate neoliberalism.

In some cases the conflict between the role of science and traditional knowledge has been difficult to resolve, and there is a worry that discourse about adaptation may be used selectively by powerful stakeholders to advance particular pathways and political agendas.»

If the ambition is broader, and this in fact a science - fiction - laced exploration of life under some kind of miscellaneous totalitarian dictatorship and the homogenisation of mankind, then you'd be forced to concede that the film fails to ignite that particular political powder - keg.

Our findings come from assessments of performance in math, science, and reading of representative samples in particular political jurisdictions of students who at the time of testing were in 4th or 8th grade or were roughly ages 9 10 or 14 15.

Whether or not girls in single - sex schools are more likely to pursue science degrees or political careers, whether or not boys in single - sex schools are more likely to write poetry or pay attention in class, single - sex schools can allow educators to address the particular interests, strengths, learning styles, and developmental stages of a single sex while allowing boys and girls to concentrate on something other than the opposite sex — at least for a few brief hours each day.

To give you a taste of what is coming in Part 2, the arguments can be summarized as: 1) Education does not lend itself to a single «best» approach, so the Gates effort to use science to discover best practices is unable to yield much productive fruit; 2) As a result, the Gates folks have mostly been falsely invoking science to advance practices and policies they prefer for which they have no scientific support; 3) Attempting to impose particular practices on the nation's education system is generating more political resistance than even the Gates Foundation can overcome, despite their focus on political influence and their devotion of significant resources to that effort; 4) The scale of the political effort required by the Gates strategy of imposing «best» practices is forcing Gates to expand its staffing to levels where it is being paralyzed by its own administrative bloat; and 5) The false invocation of science as a political tool to advance policies and practices not actually supported by scientific evidence is producing intellectual corruption among the staff and researchers associated with Gates, which will undermine their long - term credibility and influence.

Writing a political science thesis is not very difficult for many students, because even though like all other theses it involves extensive research, political science topics are relatively easy and there is a lot of room for argument for and against a particular topic, so in many cases writing such thesis comes down to simply finding solid arguments and proving your point of view.

350limit did not say to resort to magic rather than science, only that the authors have been blinded by the latter... I would refine that to refer to certain elements of scientific culture that tend toward extreme conservatism in making pronouncements or urging action — this isn't science, it's sociology, and the comments about «influencing policy» and «a particular political outcome» are also not science, or scientific.

He wants to use science to achieve a particular political end, and he doesn't care if he — in the amateur PUS / STS vernacular — «abuses science» and confuses the public in the process.

In any case, I know of no other field where like climate science the leading researchers in the field have taken a strong position on a political policy question that relies on their science turning out a particular waIn any case, I know of no other field where like climate science the leading researchers in the field have taken a strong position on a political policy question that relies on their science turning out a particular wain the field have taken a strong position on a political policy question that relies on their science turning out a particular way.

As I said in my reply to Wegman, ordinarily I would agree with him that science shouldn't be conducted through blogs, but in the case of climate science an opinion about global warming in general, or the validity of multiproxy reconstructions or climate models in particular seems to constitute for some a political viewpoint that must be either trumpeted from the rooftops or suppressed by any means possible regardless of its scientific merit.

Only particular scientific findings are in dispute and subject to bias; each political or other cultural group is pro the science it likes (values alignment), but anti the science it doesn't like (value clash).

Things have worked out dramatically differently, and I am now engaged in an intense effort to write an entirely new proposal on campus fossil fuel divestment â $» this time, fully structured around a particular theoretical framework from the literature on political science.

It is obvious in this case that a clear scientific fault has undermined the political message about the «substance of their work on the impacts», which has now left some campaigners in a quandry about whether to discard the science or the politics of this particular story or just ignore the lot!

Thus, I believe it would be appropriate for the Committee to investigate the Administration's treatment of the 2000 National Assessment, as part of oversight of the White House's political intervention in the U.S. Climate Change Science Program and in particular its assessment and communication activities.

Again in 2010, in the paper Climate Change and the Integrity of Science Peter Gleick wrote, «We are deeply disturbed by the recent escalation of political assaults on scientists in general and on climate scientists in particular.

Thank you, Dr Curry — it is indeed about protecting the integrity of science, not just of climate science, because in the end how can the general public trust any scientific statement which is used as basis for political decision making if this particular instance is being waved aside?

These, of course, include chairs, vice-chairs and members of judicial tribunals (or, to use the more common terminology, adjudicative tribunals); chairs and members of regulatory agencies; members of the bureaucracy; politicians; lawyers, paralegals, and community legal workers with experience in acting for users of the system; academics in the fields of both law and political science; students in either of those fields; and, of course, individuals and business that have experienced the system as «parties» before particular tribunals, or who can anticipate that role in the future.