HOME > 상세정보

상세정보

The scepter of reason : public discussion and political radicalism in the origins of constitutionalism

The scepter of reason : public discussion and political radicalism in the origins of constitutionalism

자료유형
단행본
개인저자
Gargarella, Roberto, 1964-
서명 / 저자사항
The scepter of reason : public discussion and political radicalism in the origins of constitutionalism / by Roberto Gargarella.
발행사항
Dordrecht ;   Boston :   Kluwer Academic,   c2000.  
형태사항
xxviii, 140 p. ; 25 cm.
총서사항
Law and philosophy library ;v. 48
ISBN
0792365089 (alk. paper)
서지주기
Includes bibliographical references (p. [131]-137) and index.
일반주제명
Representative government and representation --United States --History. Conservatism --United States --History. Populism --United States --History. Radicalism --United States --History.
주제명(지명)
United States --Politics and government.
000 00000cam u22002054a 4500
001 000000864600
005 20251224153852
008 000721s2000 ne b 001 0 eng
010 ▼a 00061091
020 ▼a 0792365089 (alk. paper)
040 ▼a DLC ▼c DLC ▼d OHX ▼d C#P ▼d UKM ▼d FCI ▼d MUQ ▼d 211009
042 ▼a pcc
043 ▼a n-us---
049 1 ▼l 111273794
050 0 0 ▼a JK31 ▼b .G37 2000
082 0 0 ▼a 320.5/0973/09033 ▼2 21
090 ▼a 320.50973 ▼b G231s
100 1 ▼a Gargarella, Roberto, ▼d 1964- ▼0 AUTH(211009)178389.
245 1 4 ▼a The scepter of reason : ▼b public discussion and political radicalism in the origins of constitutionalism / ▼c by Roberto Gargarella.
260 ▼a Dordrecht ; ▼a Boston : ▼b Kluwer Academic, ▼c c2000.
300 ▼a xxviii, 140 p. ; ▼c 25 cm.
440 0 ▼a Law and philosophy library ; ▼v v. 48
504 ▼a Includes bibliographical references (p. [131]-137) and index.
650 0 ▼a Representative government and representation ▼z United States ▼x History.
650 0 ▼a Conservatism ▼z United States ▼x History.
650 0 ▼a Populism ▼z United States ▼x History.
650 0 ▼a Radicalism ▼z United States ▼x History.
651 0 ▼a United States ▼x Politics and government.

소장정보

No. 소장처 청구기호 등록번호 도서상태 반납예정일 예약 서비스
No. 1 소장처 중앙도서관/서고6층/ 청구기호 320.50973 G231s 등록번호 111273794 (1회 대출) 도서상태 대출가능 반납예정일 예약 서비스 B M

컨텐츠정보

책소개

It is not unusual that formal and informal discussions about the political system, its virtues, and its many defects, conclude in a discussion about impartiality. In fact, we all discuss impartiality when we talk about the best way to equally consider all viewpoints. We show our concerns with impartiality when, facing a particular problem, we try to figure out the best solution for all of us, given our conflicting interests. Thus, the quest for impartiality tends to be a common objective for most of us, although we normally disagree on its particular contents. Generally, these formal and informal discussions about impartiality conclude in a dispute between different "epistemic" conceptions. That is to say, simply, that in these situations we begin to disagree about best procedure to defme the more neutral, impartial solution for all of us.! Basically, trying to answer this question we tend to fluctuate between two opposite positions. According to some, the best way to know which is the more impartial solution is to resort to a process of collective reflection: in those situations we have to consider the opinions of all those who are possibly affected.

It is not unusual that formal and informal discussions about the political system, its virtues, and its many defects, conclude in a discussion about impartiality. In fact, we all discuss impartiality when we talk about the best way to equally consider all viewpoints. We show our concerns with impartiality when, facing a particular problem, we try to figure out the best solution for all of us, given our conflicting interests. Thus, the quest for impartiality tends to be a common objective for most of us, although we normally disagree on its particular contents. Generally, these formal and informal discussions about impartiality conclude in a dispute between different "epistemic" conceptions. That is to say, simply, that in these situations we begin to disagree about best procedure to defme the more neutral, impartial solution for all of us.! Basically, trying to answer this question we tend to fluctuate between two opposite positions. According to some, the best way to know which is the more impartial solution is to resort to a process of collective reflection: in those situations we have to consider the opinions of all those who are possibly affected.


정보제공 : Aladin

목차

Preface. Introduction. 1. Radicalism and Conservatism in England. 2. Radicalism and Populism in the U.S. 3. The Conservative Reaction. James Madison: Institutional Reforms Against the Power of Factions. 4. The Conservative Reaction II. Defending the New Institutions in the Federal Convention. 5. The Conservative Model of Deliberation. Appendix: Contemporary Political Institutions and Deliberation. Bibliography. Index.


정보제공 : Aladin

관련분야 신착자료

윤인로 (2025)
최윤재 (2025)
박호성 (2025)