4,719 research outputs found
Tennessee roads / Jesse Stuart. In Mountain herald / Lincoln Memorial University.
No full textThis picturesque poem was written by then-sophomore (and future celebrated author) Jesse Stuart about the roads of Tennessee
Introduction: ‘Critical’ and ‘International Political Economy'.
No full textThere is no abstract, but this is a representative paragraph (from the introduction): 'Since the late 1970s, International Political Economy (IPE) has tended to be divided into those scholars who focus primarily upon empirical research questions in order to understand the dynamics of actors within the international system, and those who prefer to focus upon an ontological enquiry into its historical evolution. In recent developments this division has been extended into the ‘British’ and ‘American’ schools, or more vividly into the division of the ‘orthodox/heterodox’ or the ‘positivist’ and the ‘critical’ (Murphy and Nelson, 2001, 2002; Cohen, 2008), which in turn has led to concerns that such divisions might be overplayed (Higgott and Watson, 2008). The development of critical perspectives in IPE has brought with it interpretations that have drawn from Marx, Gramsci, Polanyi, Schumpeter and from poststructuralism (especially Foucault), and have been applied to a wide variety of cases. Yet, for all the work done in developing this critical ontology, precisely what binds the diversity of approaches remains confusing, as core analytical categories are too often assumed to be self-evident (for example, the critical method, methodological eclecticism, and a multidisciplinary approach).
IPE and the international political economy? IPE or the international political economy?
No full textThere is no abstract, but this is a representative paragraph (from the introduction): 'Our intention in bringing together this collection of scholars has been to begin a process of reflection on why volumes such as these are particularly timely in the current period, for both the discipline of IPE and the study of the international political economy. Although the debates on the ‘British’ and ‘American’ schools were an important catalyst for such reflections, they also built upon earlier marginalizations and silencings which were, in our view, unwarranted. Recall, for example, Robert Keohane’s more explicit invitation in the late 1980s to ‘reflectivist’ scholars to produce systematic research agendas and falsifiable claims as a means of engaging with the ‘rationalism’ dominant in IR – in other words, a demand for ‘post-positivist’ research to abandon its raison d'être and engage in narrow specifics which take for granted wider questions about the world in which we live. More recently, the explosion of contributions on ‘globalization’ tended to produce a neat conjuring trick, whereby a globalized world was (magically and tautologically) both the outcome – what needed to be explained – and the explanation of this outcome. In the process, alternative narratives were pushed to the sidelines (Rosenberg, 2000).
'Critical' and 'International Political Economy'
No full textThere is no abstract, but this is a representative paragraph (from the introduction): 'Since the late 1970s, International Political Economy (IPE) has tended to be divided into those scholars who focus primarily upon empirical research questions in order to understand the dynamics of actors within the international system, and those who prefer to focus upon an ontological enquiry into its historical evolution. In recent developments this division has been extended into the ‘British’ and ‘American’ schools, or more vividly into the division of the ‘orthodox/heterodox’ or the ‘positivist’ and the ‘critical’ (Murphy and Nelson, 2001, 2002; Cohen, 2008), which in turn has led to concerns that such divisions might be overplayed (Higgott and Watson, 2008). The development of critical perspectives in IPE has brought with it interpretations that have drawn from Marx, Gramsci, Polanyi, Schumpeter and from poststructuralism (especially Foucault), and have been applied to a wide variety of cases. Yet, for all the work done in developing this critical ontology, precisely what binds the diversity of approaches remains confusing, as core analytical categories are too often assumed to be self-evident (for example, the critical method, methodological eclecticism, and a multidisciplinary approach).
'Critical' and 'International Political Economy'
No full textThere is no abstract, but this is a representative paragraph (from the introduction): 'Since the late 1970s, International Political Economy (IPE) has tended to be divided into those scholars who focus primarily upon empirical research questions in order to understand the dynamics of actors within the international system, and those who prefer to focus upon an ontological enquiry into its historical evolution. In recent developments this division has been extended into the ‘British’ and ‘American’ schools, or more vividly into the division of the ‘orthodox/heterodox’ or the ‘positivist’ and the ‘critical’ (Murphy and Nelson, 2001, 2002; Cohen, 2008), which in turn has led to concerns that such divisions might be overplayed (Higgott and Watson, 2008). The development of critical perspectives in IPE has brought with it interpretations that have drawn from Marx, Gramsci, Polanyi, Schumpeter and from poststructuralism (especially Foucault), and have been applied to a wide variety of cases. Yet, for all the work done in developing this critical ontology, precisely what binds the diversity of approaches remains confusing, as core analytical categories are too often assumed to be self-evident (for example, the critical method, methodological eclecticism, and a multidisciplinary approach).
IPE and the international political economy? IPE or the international political economy?
No full textThere is no abstract, but this is a representative paragraph (from the introduction): 'Our intention in bringing together this collection of scholars has been to begin a process of reflection on why volumes such as these are particularly timely in the current period, for both the discipline of IPE and the study of the international political economy. Although the debates on the ‘British’ and ‘American’ schools were an important catalyst for such reflections, they also built upon earlier marginalizations and silencings which were, in our view, unwarranted. Recall, for example, Robert Keohane’s more explicit invitation in the late 1980s to ‘reflectivist’ scholars to produce systematic research agendas and falsifiable claims as a means of engaging with the ‘rationalism’ dominant in IR – in other words, a demand for ‘post-positivist’ research to abandon its raison d'être and engage in narrow specifics which take for granted wider questions about the world in which we live. More recently, the explosion of contributions on ‘globalization’ tended to produce a neat conjuring trick, whereby a globalized world was (magically and tautologically) both the outcome – what needed to be explained – and the explanation of this outcome. In the process, alternative narratives were pushed to the sidelines (Rosenberg, 2000).
IPE and the international political economy? IPE or the international political economy?
No full textThere is no abstract, but this is a representative paragraph (from the introduction): 'Our intention in bringing together this collection of scholars has been to begin a process of reflection on why volumes such as these are particularly timely in the current period, for both the discipline of IPE and the study of the international political economy. Although the debates on the ‘British’ and ‘American’ schools were an important catalyst for such reflections, they also built upon earlier marginalizations and silencings which were, in our view, unwarranted. Recall, for example, Robert Keohane’s more explicit invitation in the late 1980s to ‘reflectivist’ scholars to produce systematic research agendas and falsifiable claims as a means of engaging with the ‘rationalism’ dominant in IR – in other words, a demand for ‘post-positivist’ research to abandon its raison d'être and engage in narrow specifics which take for granted wider questions about the world in which we live. More recently, the explosion of contributions on ‘globalization’ tended to produce a neat conjuring trick, whereby a globalized world was (magically and tautologically) both the outcome – what needed to be explained – and the explanation of this outcome. In the process, alternative narratives were pushed to the sidelines (Rosenberg, 2000).
No. 617 Stuart Ruckman
No full textTranscript (12, 40 pages) of two interviews by Matt Driscoll with Stuart Ruckman on April 9, 2010, and July 7, 2011Ruckman (b. 1966) was born in Salt Lake City, Utah. Stuart shares how his family, particularly his father, played a significant role in introducing him to the outdoors. Some of his initial explorations included a hike to the top of Mount Olympus when he was five years old, backpacking trips in the Wasatch and Uinta Mountains, and a successful summit attempt on the Grand Teton when he was twelve. Stuart discovered technical rock climbing due to the influence of his older brother Bret, five years Stuart\u27s senior. Bret learned under Dennis Turville, a well-respected Salt Lake climbing instructor. Stuart shares his observations on the Salt Lake climbing community of the late 1970s and 1980s, noting the intimacy of the community, while also pointing out the significant influence of a handful of climbers, including Merrill Bitter, Les Ellison, and Brian Smoot. He briefly describes the proliferation of new-route development in the Wasatch during his first decade in climbing. In collaboration with his brother Bret, Stuart published comprehensive guidebooks on climbing in the Wasatch Mountains. Stuart\u27s contributions as a first-ascensionist and co-author of Rock Climbing the Wasatch Range attest to his lasting impact on Utah climbing. Interview is part of the Outdoor Recreation History Project. Interviewer: Matt Driscol
John Calvin, On the Christian Faith. Selections from the Institutes, Commentaries, and Tracts. Edited, with an Introduction by John T. McNeill Baruch Spinoza, On the Improvement of the Understanding. translated, with an Introduction, by Joseph Katz John Stuart Mill, Considerations on Representative Government. Edited with an Introduction by Currin V. Shields John Stuart Mill, Autobiography. With an Introduction by Currin V. Shields
No full textDopp Joseph. John Calvin, On the Christian Faith. Selections from the Institutes, Commentaries, and Tracts. Edited, with an Introduction by John T. McNeill Baruch Spinoza, On the Improvement of the Understanding. translated, with an Introduction, by Joseph Katz John Stuart Mill, Considerations on Representative Government. Edited with an Introduction by Currin V. Shields John Stuart Mill, Autobiography. With an Introduction by Currin V. Shields. In: Revue Philosophique de Louvain. Troisième série, tome 56, n°50, 1958. p. 338
George MacLeod’s open-air preaching: performance and counter-performance
No full textStuart Blythe uses the methodology of performance to analyse George MacLeod’s open-air preaching. He points out that MacLeod’s preaching was derived from a theology of the incarnation, and an understanding of the paradoxes and dichotomies of common human life. This preaching, Blythe suggests, was also a counter-performance in the context of outlooks and ideologies inimical to the gospel. The paper raises interesting issues related to preaching as performance, and the further question as to whether or not the life and work of the Church as a whole might now be better understood as a counter-performance.Publisher PD
- …
