Journals / Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2013 / Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 46

PUBLIC POLICIES FROM POLITICAL SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE: EPISTEMOLOGICAL AND ONTOLOGICAL DISCUSSIONS

SİYASET BİLİMİ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN KAMU POLİTİKALARI: EPİSTEMOLOJİK VE ONTOLOJİK DEĞERLENDİRMELER

Pages
322–336
Publication Date
2013-02-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Post-positivism is presented before a comparative evaluation of approaches to the market economy in political science is discussed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Due to various political, social, and environmental parameters, public policy making and administration is getting more complex.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Therefore, various theoretical approaches and methodologies are generated to understand and explain the political issues.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Post-positivism is presented before a comparative evaluation of approaches to the market economy in political science is discussed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Epistemoloji · Ontoloji · Pozitivizm

Abstract

Due to various political, social, and environmental parameters, public policy making and administration is getting more complex. Therefore, various theoretical approaches and methodologies are generated to understand and explain the political issues. Resembling to lenses, epistemology and ontology help the researchers determine the way they look at knowledge and objects. Three major approaches, Positivism, Interpretivism, and Realism, and their assumptions are epistemologically and ontologically evaluated. Post-positivism is presented before a comparative evaluation of approaches to the market economy in political science is discussed.

Özet

Kamu politikaları yapımı ve yönetiminde, politik, sosyal ve çevresel birçok parametre etkili olduğundan, daha karmaşık hale gelmiştir. O yüzden birçok teorik yaklaşım ve metodoloji ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu çalışmada, öncelikle bilgi kuramına bakış açısını belirleyen ve bir lens görevi yapan epistemoloji ve ontolojinin neler olduğuna değinilecektir. Üç temel yaklaşım olan; Pozitivizm, İnterpretivizm ve Realizm'e epistemolojik ve ontolojik olarak bakılacak ve özelliklerinden genel hatlarıyla bahsedilecektir. Daha sonra, Post-pozitivizm anlatılacak, karşılaştırmalı bir değerlendirme yapılarak siyaset bilimi literatüründe yer alan pazar piyasasına (market economy) bu perspektiften bakılacaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜL, Z. G. V. S. K. (2013). PUBLIC POLICIES FROM POLITICAL SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE: EPISTEMOLOGICAL AND ONTOLOGICAL DISCUSSIONS. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 46, 322–336. https://ajindex.com/articles/97758

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Akarsu, B. (1975).
  2. Felsefe terimleri sözlüğü. Ankara, TR: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.Ayers, M. (1993). Locke: Epistemology and ontology. London, UK; New York, US: Routledge. Angen, M. J. (2000). Evaluating interpretive inguiry: Reviewing the validity debate and opening the dialogue. Qualitative Health Research 10 (3), 378-395.
  3. Burrell, G. ve Morgan, G.(1979). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis: Elements of the sociology of corporate life. London, UK: Heineman. Campbell, D. T., ve Stanley, J. C. (1966). Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. DeLeon, P. (1988). Advice and consent: The development of the policy sciences. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Dolu, O. (2010). Suç Teorileri: Teori, Araştırma ve Uygulamada Kriminoloji, Ankara:
  4. Seçkin Yayıncılık. Emeklier, B. (2011). Uluslararası Đlişkiler Disiplininde Epistemolojik Paradigma Tartışmaları: Postpozitivist Kuramlar. Bilge Strateji, 2 (4), 139-184.
  5. Fayol, H. (1949). General and industrial management. (C. Storrs, Trans.). London: Pitman Publishing. Fischer, F. (1980). Politics, values, and public policy: The problem of methodology. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  6. Fischer, F. (1995).
  7. Evaluating public policy. Chicago, IL: WadsworthThomson Learning. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  8. Fischer, F.(2007). Deliberative policy analysis as practical reason: Integrating empirical and normative arguments. In F. Fischer, G. J. Miller, & M. S. Sydney (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, policy, and methods (pp.223-236).
  9. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group. Geertz, C. (1972). Notes on the Balinese cockfight. Daedalus, 101 (1), 1-37.
  10. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic Books. Geertz, H. & Geertz, C. (1975).
  11. Kinship in Bali. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  12. Goles, T. ve Hirschheim, R. (2000). The paradigm is dead, the paradigm is dead…long live the paradigm: The legacy of Burrell and Morgan. Omega, 28, 249-268.
  13. Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the Evolution of Society. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
  14. Gül, Z. (2011). Kamu Politikasında Kurumsallık (Institutionalism) Teorisi, A. Kaptı ( Ed.) Kamu Politika Süreci: Teorik Perspektifler, ss.71-84. Ankara:
  15. Seçkin Yayıncılık. Gül, Z. (2011). Kamu Politika Sürecine Teorik Bakış ve Kritik Bir Değerlendirme, A. Kaptı ( Ed.) Kamu Politika Süreci: T