POLMETH Archives

Political Methodology Society

POLMETH@LISTSERV.WUSTL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Benoît Rihoux <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Political Methodology Society <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:02:52 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (87 lines)
*****
This is a roundmessage - apologies for cross-postings
Ceci est un message collectif - desole si messages croises
-----------------------

Dear colleague,

At the next ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops in Rennes (France) from 11 to
16 April 08 (main page : see
http://www.rennes2008.visionmd.co.uk/index.html ), there will be a
workshop on :

"Methodological Pluralism? Consolidating Political Science Methodology"
(workshop nr 10)

==
ABSTRACT :
Given the relative youth of political science as a discipline, and its
tendency to draw on many tangential fields of research, there is a
pressing need to encourage more methodological reflection and discussion
among political scientists. This workshop aims to fill that need. To
encourage this sort of discussion, we invite papers that address one of
three related sources of cleavages in contemporary political science.
These three cleavages can be illustrated with a series of related
questions:
- Is the study of political science better served by methodological
pluralism or Consilience (Wilson 1998)? What are the advantages and
disadvantages of these two positions, and how strongly are they reflected
in the discipline?
- What are the methodological consequences of the increased use of
methods’ triangulation (broadly defined, the use of more than one method
to support an argument)? What can explain this increase? What types of
triangulation strategies are developing, and what are their respective
strengths and limitations?
- What are the methodological consequences of our reliance on imported
methods from tangential disciplines? Given the inter-disciplinary nature
of much political science research, we tend to rely heavily on the import
of both methods and methodologies from tangential fields of study. How has
this import affected the nature of methodological discussions in political
science (if at all)?
==

Full infos -- including a more detailed description of the topic, the
types of papers we would welcome etc. -- can be found at :
http://www.rennes2008.visionmd.co.uk/Workshop_details.asp?workshopID=10

[you can also find those pages thru the "Rennes" link on the main ECPR
page : http://www.essex.ac.uk/ecpr/ ]

NB : DEADLINE FOR PROPOSALS : 1 DECEMBER 07. Please send proposals to both
of us [main contact for further enquiries : Jonathon Moses]

Feel free to circulate this information along your lists.

Best regards,

Profs. Jonathon Moses & Benoit Rihoux, workshop directors
[log in to unmask], [log in to unmask]

-- 
Prof. Benoit Rihoux
Centre de Politique Comparee
Universite catholique de Louvain (UCL)
1/7 Place Montesquieu
1348 Louvain-la-Neuve
Belgique / Belgium
T : +32 10 47 41 90
F : +32 10 47 46 03
Mail/courriel : [log in to unmask] [NB NEW MAIL !]
http://www.compasss.org

ECPR Summer School in Methods and Techniques :
http://www.essex.ac.uk/ecpr/events/summerschools/ljubljana/index.aspx

**********************************************************
             Political Methodology E-Mail List
   Editors: Melanie Goodrich, <[log in to unmask]>
            Delia Bailey, <[log in to unmask]>
**********************************************************
        Send messages to [log in to unmask]
  To join the list, cancel your subscription, or modify
           your subscription settings visit:

          http://polmeth.wustl.edu/polmeth.php

**********************************************************

ATOM RSS1 RSS2