http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/ An ARC blog Sun, 22 Jan 2012 06:46:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/comment-page-1/#comment-212 Stephen Collier Thu, 01 Mar 2007 18:48:46 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/#comment-212 So, for example, "regime" is a universal empirical concept as opposed to "democracy" which is a subtype of a broader concept. "Regime" is universal in the sense that it encompasses all cases of the thing in question. So, for example, “regime” is a universal empirical concept as opposed to “democracy” which is a subtype of a broader concept. “Regime” is universal in the sense that it encompasses all cases of the thing in question.

]]> http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/comment-page-1/#comment-73 Karpiak Wed, 14 Feb 2007 05:25:26 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/#comment-73 I don't know if that answers the "why do we need universals?" question. While Sartori is concerned with shifting the orientation, or directionality of political scientific concepts, the "why universals?" question is more interested in the function of the "uni" for knowledge production. A relevant question for a network of scholars dissatisfied with the uni-versity as a pedagogical form, no? I don’t know if that answers the “why do we need universals?” question. While Sartori is concerned with shifting the orientation, or directionality of political scientific concepts, the “why universals?” question is more interested in the function of the “uni” for knowledge production. A relevant question for a network of scholars dissatisfied with the uni-versity as a pedagogical form, no?

]]> http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/comment-page-1/#comment-39 scollier Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:15:14 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/#comment-39 I think by "universal" he simply means "general" in the sense of applying to a wide universe of cases. I think that philosophical universal would be Hegel. Empirical universal would be something like analytical construct or ideal type? I think by “universal” he simply means “general” in the sense of applying to a wide universe of cases. I think that philosophical universal would be Hegel. Empirical universal would be something like analytical construct or ideal type?

]]> http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/comment-page-1/#comment-35 chris kelty Tue, 06 Feb 2007 20:20:22 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/#comment-35 Here's the <a href="http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-0554%28197012%2964%3A4%3C1033%3ACMICP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A" rel="nofollow">link</a> in jstor... Here’s the link in jstor…

]]> http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/comment-page-1/#comment-34 Paul Rabinow Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:02:52 +0000 http://anthropos-lab.net/bpc/2007/02/method-and-the-contemporary/#comment-34 Terrific. I wonder what he means by an empirical universal. The same thing as Hegel? or Sartre? Why do we need universals? Your loyal nominalist. Terrific.
I wonder what he means by an empirical universal. The same thing as Hegel? or Sartre?
Why do we need universals?
Your loyal nominalist.

]]>