De deliberatibus disputandum est: a response to Jürg Steiner

Lade...
Vorschaubild
Datum
2008
Herausgeber:innen
Kontakt
ISSN der Zeitschrift
eISSN
item.preview.dc.identifier.isbn
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
URI (zitierfähiger Link)
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
ArXiv-ID
Internationale Patentnummer
EU-Projektnummer
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Gesperrt bis
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Forschungsvorhaben
Organisationseinheiten
Zeitschriftenheft
Publikationstyp
Zeitschriftenartikel
Publikationsstatus
Erschienen in
European Political Science ; 7 (2008), 2. - S. 199-206
Zusammenfassung
This article takes issue with Steiner's polemic against the usage of deliberation in rational choice scholarship. I show i) that the reproach that rationalists do not allow for preference change is mistaken; ii) that Steiner does not sufficiently distinguish between normative and positive contributions and iii) that he shields his preferred model against systematic comparisons with strategic models of deliberation. In my view, we need more competing model evaluations rather than misleading attacks against imagined heretics.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
320 Politik
Schlagwörter
Deliberation,Geschworenentheorem,Kollektive Entscheidungsfindung,Wissenschaftstheorie,Deliberation,Condorcet Jury Theorem,Social Choice,Rational Choice,Theory of Science
Konferenz
Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined. - (undefined; undefined)
Zitieren
ISO 690SCHNEIDER, Gerald, 2008. De deliberatibus disputandum est: a response to Jürg Steiner. In: European Political Science. 7(2), pp. 199-206. Available under: doi: 10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210189
BibTex
@article{Schneider2008delib-3943,
  year={2008},
  doi={10.1057/palgrave.eps.2210189},
  title={De deliberatibus disputandum est: a response to Jürg Steiner},
  number={2},
  volume={7},
  journal={European Political Science},
  pages={199--206},
  author={Schneider, Gerald}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/3943">
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">This article takes issue with Steiner's polemic against the usage of  deliberation  in rational choice scholarship. I show i) that the reproach that rationalists do not allow for preference change is mistaken; ii) that Steiner does not sufficiently distinguish between normative and positive contributions and iii) that he shields his preferred model against systematic comparisons with strategic models of deliberation. In my view, we need more competing model evaluations rather than misleading attacks against imagined heretics.</dcterms:abstract>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/42"/>
    <dcterms:bibliographicCitation>First publ. in: European Political Science 7 (2008), 2, pp. 199-206</dcterms:bibliographicCitation>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/3943"/>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:title>De deliberatibus disputandum est: a response to Jürg Steiner</dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
    <dc:contributor>Schneider, Gerald</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Schneider, Gerald</dc:creator>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-03-24T10:09:44Z</dc:date>
    <dcterms:issued>2008</dcterms:issued>
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/3943/1/eps_responsetojuergsteiner.pdf"/>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/3943/1/eps_responsetojuergsteiner.pdf"/>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/42"/>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-03-24T10:09:44Z</dcterms:available>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
Interner Vermerk
xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter
Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.
Prüfdatum der URL
Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation
Finanzierungsart
Kommentar zur Publikation
Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Ja
Begutachtet