Posts Tagged ‘Political Science’

JMC Summer Institute in Chicago

Monday, July 26th, 2010

The Jack Miller Center will convene our second  Summer Institute, July 26 – August 7, in Chicago, Il. Our first Chicago Summer Institute will bring together some of the nation’s leading junior scholars. The program includes faculty mentors from the fields of Political Science, History, and Economics, as well as workshops focusing on academic career development. For more information or participant nominations, contact Emily Koons.

2010 Theme
Chicago - Streeterville: John Hancock Center a...

Chicago

Liberty and Enterprise: The American Founding and the Birth of the Modern Commercial Republic

The American Constitution stands as one of the great achievements of modern philosophical and political thought.  There had been prior forms of free government in the West, from the Roman Republic, to the short-lived democratic city states of ancient Greece, to the constitutional monarchy of Great Britain.  The Framers were keen students of the strengths and weaknesses and triumphs and failures of earlier attempts to establish and perpetuate a free system of government.  Yet even as Founders readily acknowledged their indebtedness to the great thinkers and statesmen of the Western tradition, they also believed that they were creating something unprecedented, a “new order for the ages” – a new regime that was both a reflection of and a departure from its historical antecedents.  Nowhere was this departure more evident than in the Founders embrace of commerce and the free market.

For much of European history, commerce was viewed as a servile activity, something that occupied the lower classeAs, or “middling sorts”, but which was beneath the dignity of an aristocratic ruling class.  In establishing a new constitutional and commercial order, the Founders had to contend not only with past critics who doubted the practicality and wisdom of extending political freedom to ordinary citizens, but also with a substantial body of thinking which held that commercial activity and the pursuit of material gain undermined a people’s commitment to the public good.   Indeed, one of the unique features of the American Founding was not only that its leading figures defended both free government and the free market, but that they also believed that liberty and commerce, far from being incompatible, were mutually reinforcing features of life in a flourishing free society.

To be sure, the Founders themselves often disagreed among themselves on any number of issues regarding the constitution and economic affairs.  At this year’s summer institute we will engage the debate the Founders themselves engaged in.  What are the necessary elements of both free political institutions and a free market, and are they in fact mutually reinforcing or at times in tension with one another?  Does the pursuit of material gain seamlessly promote the public good, or is it at times in tension with the public good?  And what institutions and institutional restraints did the Founders envision would be necessary to manage such tensions and promote political stability, and economic prosperity, while protecting individual liberty?  Does a system of self-government and free enterprise depend on certain moral preconditions such as honesty, trustworthiness, a respect for the rule of law and a sense of fair play, and what is the origin of such virtues?  And has the great expansion of the state in the 19th and 20th centuries preserved individual liberty and promoted prosperity, or does it represent an unnecessary or even dangerous departure from the original vision of the Founders?

Program Goals

The Jack Miller Center seeks to advance the teaching of America’s founding principles and the broader traditions of Western Civilization on College Campuses around the country.  The Summer Institutes are an integral part of our overall mission.  Each summer institute brings together twenty-five faculty members and advanced graduate students from around the country for seminars, workshops and lectures led by many of our country’s leading scholars, educators and public intellectuals. Our goal at the summer institutes is to assist in the cultivation, support and professional advancement of the next generation of college and university professors.

Morning Seminars

Our seminars offer the most promising young scholars in the humanities and social sciences the opportunity to reflect upon and discuss the enduring ideas, issues and questions from the American past and the traditions of Western Civilization, as a means of deepening and enriching their knowledge of our history and institutions.  Led by our summer institute teaching faculty, the morning seminars allow for a robust and thoughtful discussion of the central ideas, thinkers, and texts from our history.  Each member of our summer institute teaching faculty will offer a combination of primary and secondary source readings, or original research, that explore different aspects of this year’s theme.  Participants will have the opportunity to engage the presenter and each other in a discussion of the day’s topic in an atmosphere of civility and intellectual freedom.  Morning seminars are designed not only to give the participants an opportunity to deepen their thinking concerning the central ideas of the American past, but also to develop new ideas for original research and fresh approaches to the questions that have long animated discussions of American society.  In addition, the seminars offer participants the chance to observe the teaching methods of some of the most respected scholars in higher education.

Afternoon Workshops

Our afternoon workshops are designed to assist faculty members with their professional advancement, with a particular focus on teaching, publishing, and securing tenure.  Members of our institute teaching faculty lead workshops focusing on the development of intellectually engaging courses dealing with the key ideas, themes, and events from the American past, in addition to leading workshops on effective teaching methods.  Other workshops, led by the directors of academic presses, focus on building successful book proposals and successfully navigating the editorial approval process.

Lectures

In addition to the seminars and workshops, each summer institute will feature a number of luncheon and dinner lecturers, delivered by leading academics, educators, political commentators and prominent public officials.

Each summer institute also offers our participants ample opportunities for informal discussion with our institute faculty and with one another, and time for reading, reflection and study.

Ongoing Support

In addition to the honorarium for attending the summer institute, Miller Summer Institute Fellows may be eligible to receive funds to conduct campus programming to further education in American Founding Principles.  New Miller Center Fellows can become eligible for our subsequent appointments as Annual Miller Center Fellows.  Miller Center Staff and its Academic Council are committed to assisting all Miller Fellows, whenever possible, with publishing, securing grants from public and private sources, recruitment of participants for on-campus programming, securing employment, and facilitating contacts and developing relationships with other faculty members and past Miller Fellows.

Enhanced by Zemanta

“American Political Thought” at the APSA

Wednesday, July 21st, 2010
Inauguration, 1913 (LOC)

Inaugural Event

The American Political Science Association has recently recognized the formation of a related group called “American Political Thought.” The group was started by Steven Kautz and Benjamin Kleinerman of Michigan State University for the purpose of providing a much needed outlet for scholarship:

Statement of Need:

The purpose of this related group is to promote interest in, and provide an outlet for, the presentation of research on American Political Thought.  American Political Thought comprises, among other things, the study of fundamental and/or authoritative texts that are constitutive of American political life; the study of the first principles that ground constitutionalism and democracy in the United States; and the study of the public philosophies or sentiments that have animated political parties (and ultimately the “public mind,” to borrow Lincoln’s expression) throughout American political history.  It is related to, but distinct from, the study of American political development and institutions, on one hand, and the study of modern political philosophy and contemporary democratic theory, on the other.

Panel:

The inaugural panel, entitled “Philosophy and American Political Thought” will held Saturday, September 4th at the American Political Science convention in Washington D.C. (meeting room TBD):

  • James Ceaser, UVA: “Alexis de Tocqueville and the Two-Founding Thesis”
  • Randal Hendrickson, Duke University: “Liberalism and Republicanism in the American Political Tradition”
  • Thomas Pangle, UT Austin: “Montesquieu and the Basis of Liberal Modernity in America”

Reception:

A joint reception with the Jack Miller Center will be held September 3rd at 7:30 in Columbia 1 at the Hilton Washington.

All are invited to attend.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Politics Reformed: The Anglo-American Legacy of Covenant Theology

Friday, July 2nd, 2010

By Glenn A. Moots

Politics Reformed

Book Description

Many studies have considered the Bible’s relationship to politics, but almost all have ignored the heart of its narrative and theology: the covenant. In this book, Glenn Moots explores the political meaning of covenants past and present by focusing on the theory and application of covenantal politics from the sixteenth through the eighteenth centuries. Moots demands that we revisit political theology because it served as the most important school of politics in early modern Europe and America. He describes the strengths of the covenant tradition while also presenting its limitations and dangers. Contemporary political scientists such as Eric Voegelin, Daniel Elazar, and David Novak are called on to provide insight into both the covenant’s history and its relevance today. Moots’ work chronicles and critiques the covenant tradition while warning against both political ideology and religious enthusiasm. It provides an inclusive and objective outline of covenantal politics by considering the variations of Reformed theology and their respective consequences for political practice. This includes a careful account of how covenant theology took root on the European continent in the sixteenth century and then inspired ecclesiastical and civil politics in England, Scotland, and America. Moots goes beyond the usual categories of Calvinism or Puritanism to consider the larger movement of which both were a part. By integrating philosophy, theology, and history, Moots also invites investigation of broader political traditions such as natural law and natural right. “Politics Reformed” demonstrates how the application of political theology over three centuries has important lessons for our own dilemmas about church and state. It makes a provocative contribution to understanding foundational questions in an era of rising fundamentalism and emboldened secularism, inspiring readers to rethink the importance of religion in political theory and practice, and the role of the covenant tradition in particular.

Buy it now.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Call for Papers Northeastern Political Science Association

Friday, May 21st, 2010

Northeastern Political Science Association

www.northeasternpsa.com

2010 Annual Meeting

11-13 November 2010

Boston, Massachusetts

Conference Hotel:  Omni Parker House, 60 School St., Boston, MA 02108  (www.omnihotels.com)

CALL FOR PAPERS AND PARTICIPATION

The 42nd Annual Meeting of the Northeastern Political Science Association (NPSA) will be held at the Omni Parker House Hotel in Boston, on Nov. 11-13, 2010. Proposals for papers, panels, or roundtable discussions, and to serve as a chair and/or discussant must be submitted by June 15, 2010 via the NPSA submission website (e-mail submissions will not be accepted):

http://convention2.allacademic.com/one/npsa/npsa10/

(Once on the submission website, create a username and password and follow the instructions.)

Only one paper submission per person will be accepted. A paper presenter may also serve as a chair or discussant on a second panel or as a round-table participant. Questions should be directed to the Section Chair or the Program Chair (see below). Additional information about the conference is available on the NPSA website.

PROGRAM CHAIR

Eric N. Budd

Fitchburg State College

Phone: 978 665-3732

ebudd@fsc.edu

POLITICAL THEORY

ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

All aspects of Ancient (Greek, Roman) and Medieval (Jewish, Christian, Islamic) Political Thought

Dustin A. Gish

Department of Political Science

College of the Holy Cross

307 Fenwick Hall, Worcester, MA 01610

Phone:  508-793-3519

dgish@holycross.edu

ANNOUNCEMENT:

The 2010 annual meeting of the Northeastern Political Science Association (NPSA) will be held in Boston, MA, this November 11-13. Please see the “Call for Proposals” for papers and full panels within the “Ancient and Medieval Political Philosophy” section. Proposals must be submitted on-line through the NPSA submission website. The deadline for submissions to be posted on-line is June 15.

Boston in 1772 vs. 1880.

Boston 1772

At the 2009 Annual Meeting, the “Ancient and Medieval Political Philosophy” section was (for a second year in a row) the largest at the conference, with 24 panels, 80 papers and presentations, and nearly 100 panel participants overall. Your participation, as well as your assistance in encouraging colleagues and graduate students to attend, is essential to our future success.

Best Regards,
Dustin Gish

Department of Political Science

College of the Holy Cross

307 Fenwick Hall,

Worcester, MA 01610

Phone:  508-793-3519

Fax: 508-793-3945

dgish@holycross.edu

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

The Jack Miller Center Chairman’s Award for Best Dissertation in American Political Thought

Wednesday, May 19th, 2010


The Jack Miller Center Chairman’s Award for Best Dissertation in American Political Thought is given to young scholars in Political Science whose dissertation represents a unique contribution to the study of American Political Thought, and whose scholarly work meets with the highest standards of the profession.

  • The Award is given annually at the national meeting of the American Political Science Association, and carries with it a cash prize of $500.
  • The deadline for nominations is July 1st.  Nominations for the prize should be submitted to Dr. Michael Andrews, Vice President for Academic Programs, The Jack Miller Center for Teaching America’s Founding Principles and History, and should include both a hard copy and an electronic file of the abstract and introduction of the dissertation.  The nominating faculty member must be a member of the candidate’s dissertation committee, or a scholar familiar with the candidate’s work.  One letter of recommendation from a member of the candidate’s dissertation committee is required.  Dr. Andrews can be reached at mandrews@gojmc.org.
  • Nominations will be evaluated by Miller Center staff, members of the Miller Center Academic Council, and an outside committee of scholars who will assess the dissertation according to the excellence of its subject matter, scholarly merit, and the originality of its contribution to the study of American political thought.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Michael Zuckert Receives ASFI Award

Thursday, May 6th, 2010

• Lisa Walenceus

From University of Notre Dame: Faculty News, General News, and Research

Michael Zuckert, Nancy Reeves Dreux Professor of Political Science and former chair of Notre Dame’s Department of Political Science, will receive the Association for the Study of Free Institutions (ASFI) Award for Distinguished Scholarship on the Nature of a Free Society at the association’s annual conference in May 2010 at Princeton University.

According to Carson Holloway, executive director of ASFI, “Michael Zuckert—with his outstanding work on the political thought of John Locke, on the American founding, and on the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, among many other topics—is a worthy recipient of this award.”

ASFI inaugurated the annual honor not just to recognize a single work of scholarship but to recognize a scholar whose entire body of work is characterized by intellectual excellence and attention to the foundations of a free society, its character, or the challenges that it faces.

“Michael Zuckert is one of America’s most eminent scholars of American political thought and constitutional studies,” Michael Desch, current department chair, notes. “In addition, he has been a real leader here at Notre Dame in building one of the nation’s preeminent programs in that area, at the undergraduate, graduate, and post-doctoral levels. He richly deserves this award both in recognition of his own scholarship on free institutions and also for what he has contributed to building a community of younger citizens and scholars who’ll follow in his footsteps.”

In addition to accepting the award, Zuckert will deliver the AFSI conference’s keynote address, titled “Natural Law, Natural Rights, and the American Republic.”

“Of course, I consider it a great honor to be given the AFSI award,” Zuckert says. “I have devoted my scholarly life to trying to understand better the nature of human freedom and a free society, and it pleases me very much that my work has struck some as contributing to that task in a positive way.”

Co-sponsored by the University of Nebraska at Omaha, the Bouton Law Lecture Fund, and Princeton’s James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions, the 2010 AFSI conference will feature scholars from the social sciences and humanities speaking on the influence of natural law thinking on the American founders, the role of natural law and natural rights in post-founding American history and politics, the place of natural law in American jurisprudence, and the compatibility of the doctrine of natural rights with prudence and community.

Zuckert’s scholarship focuses on political philosophy, American constitutional law and theory, and American political thought. Author of Natural Rights and the New Republicanism, The Natural Rights Republic, and Launching Liberalism: On Lockean Political Philosophy, he most recently co-edited The Anti-Federalist Writings of the Melancton Smith Circle with Derek Webb in 2009. He co-authored and co-produced the public radio series Mr. Adams and Mr. Jefferson: A Nine Part Drama for the Radio and was senior scholar for Liberty!, a six-hour public television series on the American Revolution. He also was lead scholar for two other PBS series, one on Benjamin Franklin and another on Alexander Hamilton.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Ashland University: Assistant Professor of Political Science

Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010


Ashland University

Ashland University

The Department of History and Political Science at Ashland University seeks a broadly educated person to fill a tenure-track position at the rank of Assistant Professor beginning August 2010.  Teaching responsibilities include upper-level courses in American politics, especially the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court, and introductory courses in American history or American politics. The Department emphasizes the study of political thought and statesmanship through the use of primary sources and the great texts of political thought.  Consistent with this emphasis, the Department seeks a person who studies American politics from the perspective of political thought and statesmanship, although not to the exclusion of contemporary issues in American politics. The successful candidate must demonstrate excellence in and a strong commitment to undergraduate teaching in a traditional liberal arts setting.  Depending on qualifications, the candidate may also have an opportunity to teach in the Department’s Masters of American History and Government program.  PhD required; ABD considered. As with all tenure-track appointments at Ashland University, faculty members are expected to conduct appropriate scholarship and research and participate in university service and student advising.  Send letter of application, vita, letters of recommendation, writing sample, and graduate and undergraduate transcripts to Chair, American Politics Search Committee, Department of History and Political Science, Ashland University, Ashland, OH  44805.  Consideration of applications will begin on February 15, 2010 and continue until the position is filled.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Miller Post-Doc at Emory

Monday, December 28th, 2009

The Program in Democracy and Citizenship and the Political Science Department at Emory University invite applications for the Jack Miller Center Post-Doctoral Fellowship in American Political Thought for the 2010-2011 academic year. The Miller Fellow will teach three courses focusing on the American political tradition over two semesters. In addition, the Fellow will be expected to participate in the scholarly activity of the department and conduct his/her own research. Salary is competitive.

Please send a letter of  interest, including a discussion of what courses you propose to teach, teaching evaluations, if they are available, curriculum vitae and two letters of recommendation to:

Emory University

Emory Seal

Professor Harvey Klehr

Department of Political Science

Emory University

Atlanta, GA 30322.

To ensure full consideration, please have all materials sent by January 30, 2010.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Political Science at Concordia University

Thursday, December 10th, 2009

Political Science

Logo of Concordia University

Canadian Politics and Public Administration and International Relations

The Department of Political Science invites applications for up to five limited-term appointments in the following subfields: Canadian politics and public administration and international relations; ability to teach political theory or comparative politics will be an asset. These are teaching positions involving an 18-credit (six classes) workload. Candidates must have a PhD or be near completion

Applications should consist of a cover letter, a current curriculum vitae, a statement of teaching interests, and evidence of teaching effectiveness.

Candidates should arrange for three letters of reference to be sent directly

to:

Dr. Peter Stoett, Chair, Department of Political Science c/o Concordia University

1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. W.,

Montreal, Qc. H3G 1M8

pstoett@alcor.concordia.ca

http://politicalscience.concordia.ca/

These positions are subject to budgetary approval and department/unit need.

Individuals holding limited-term appointments may be reappointed, given continued funding and need, as well as satisfactory job performance.

Together, initial appointments and subsequent reappointments may not exceed

36 months or a span of three consecutive years. They are normally at the rank of Lecturer or Assistant Professor, beginning August 15, 2010 and ending May 31, 2011. Successful candidates will normally be expected to teach three courses per semester.

All inquiries should be directed to Dr. Stoett at pstoett@alcor.concordia.ca. Review of applications will begin as they are received and will continue until the required position has been filled. All applications should reach the department no later than March 15, 2010.

All qualified candidates are encouraged to apply; however, Canadian citizens and permanent residents of Canada will be given priority. Concordia University is committed to employment equity.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Wilfred McClay on A Discipline in Denial

Monday, November 2nd, 2009

From the Wall Street Journal

By WILFRED M. MCCLAY

Earlier this month, Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma swooped in on the National Science Foundation budget, offering an amendment that would ban the organization from “wasting any federal research funding on political-science projects.” The assumption that the money was better spent on “real science,” seemed to cause the entire quarrelsome field of political scientists to rise as one in righteous opposition.

Querulous academics often are their own worst enemies in these funding battles. They quickly wax hysterical, unaware that platitudes about supporting “free inquiry” do not cut much with the general public. Should NSF be spending $188,206 to support a study of “candidate ambiguity and voter choice,” designed to ascertain how politicians benefit from being vague?

Still, the political scientists have a point. The program has been going since the early 1960s, and the dollar amounts have always been relatively small—the money for political science projects have amounted to $112 million over a 10-year period, compared to NSF’s budget request for 2010 of more than $7 billion. While it is true that, as one of Mr. Coburn’s aides wisecracked to the Washington Times, “professors across America will hardly be thrown on the streets with only their tweed jackets to keep them warm,” the tininess of the dollar amounts cuts both ways and suggests that budget hawks may be wasting their time.

There are other reasons to think that this battle may be ill-chosen. The very program under fire supported the work of Elinor Ostrom, who won a Nobel Prize in economics this year for her work advancing the role of free institutions, rather than governments, in managing natural resources—an analysis Mr. Coburn might find valuable.

Yet there is a deeper question raised by this quarrel, and that is the Faustian bargain by which the study of politics is joined to “science.” As Indiana political scientist Jeffrey C. Isaac has observed: “We political scientists can and should do a better job of making the public relevance of our work clearer and of doing more relevant work.”

True enough. And Mr. Isaac might have added that political science could benefit from embracing “science” less intently and instead seek to recover its identity as a discipline rooted in canonical works, such as Aristotle’s “Politics,” that combine empirical observation with moral and philosophical reflection.

Modern political “science,” however, beginning with such figures as Machiavelli and Hobbes, set out to make the subject of politics more “scientific” precisely by freeing it from its moorings in moral philosophy and abandoning such formative goals as the cultivation of moral virtue in the citizenry. Instead, it focused on the value-neutral, quantitative study of observable political behavior. The definition of politics offered in 1953 by University of Chicago political scientist David Easton—”the behaviors or set of interactions through which authoritative allocations (or binding decisions) are made and implemented for a society”—can be taken to typify the behavioralist, functionalist and “scientistic” outlook that came to dominate American political science for most of the 20th century. That dominance reached a pinnacle of sorts in the “rational choice” approach, which exceeds all its predecessors in setting the production of precise (and experimentally testable) mathematical models for political behavior as the only goal worthy of political science.

That a higher status is routinely accorded to the “harder” sciences is nothing new in American history. Alexis de Tocqueville claimed in 1840 that Americans were “addicted” to “practical science” while indifferent to any “theoretical science” that could not promise a concrete payoff. The historian Daniel Boorstin went even further in 1953, asserting that the U.S. was “one of the most spectacularly lopsided cultures in all of history” because the amazing vitality of its political institutions was equaled by “the amazing poverty and inarticulateness of [its] theorizing about politics.” Boorstin seemed to think that this unreflectiveness was a virtue, a built-in protection against such revolutionary ideologies as Nazism and communism.

Perhaps so, but in putting it this way Boorstin was selling short the very American political tradition whose principles have underwritten the nation’s political vitality and longevity. True, it is not a tradition upheld by massive tomes. In fact, it more closely resembles a patchwork of occasional pieces, composed in response to particular circumstances—Tom Paine’s “Common Sense,” the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson’s “Notes on the State of Virginia,” The Federalist Papers, the writings of John C. Calhoun, the Lincoln-Douglas debates, and much more. Most were produced in the white heat of political exigency; none was the product of systematic and detached reflection on a par with the great treatises of European political thought. It is a rich tradition of reflection and intelligent debate on certain recurrent themes, a political midrash devoted to the endless reconsideration of such matters as sovereignty, the separation and division of powers, the meaning of federalism, the sources of political authority, the proper place of religion in public life, and the rights and responsibilities of individuals. None of this is reducible to “science” in the National Science Foundation’s sense of the word. Whatever his intentions, Sen. Coburn may be doing political scientists a favor by reminding them of that fact.

—Mr. McClay is a visiting professor at Pepperdine University this year.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]