I love the cross fertilization Fukuyama uses with biology. Many social scientists are woefully ignorant of a field that is so central to understanding what makes us what we are.
J'aurais aimé entendre le point de vue de Francis Fukuyama sur les réformes politiques de Shinzo Abe sur : - réinterprétation de l'article 9 de la constitution, - possibilité d'exporter des armements, - possibilité pour la force "self-defence" japonaise d'intervenir à l'étranger
Why all the vitriol and hate? I find mr Fukuyama to be very thoughfull. And sure enough politics, economics and sociology can be viewed through the lens of science, why on earth not? Some of the comments seem like the product of some deep offense being taken, something only a religious or religiously-like held belief or viewpoint could do.
Democracy often ends up in chaos is bcoz ppl needs bread and butter more than ideology. And even if it does well, for instance in United Staes, but all is oblivious of fact that United States took 170 years before it became democratic. This is the ignorant part of the west academicians and Professor Fukuyama isn’t spared...More so with the help of technology such as internet services, notwithstanding peasants farmers from China are taken of the lands resulting in pent up frustrations or protests, that part of social conflicts have been substantially rectified, improved and amended with the help of technology. These sort of conflicts were hardly recognized nor improved earlier in China, but it has certainly changed in today’s era.
100 plus electorate countries, less than 10 % are admirable. India, Indonesia, Malaysia, EU, big failings in Africa, Egypt, and the so called perfect model, United States..etc, all are without problems. The few that are praiseworthy are South Korea, Japan and Singapore ( republic), those are of Confucianism emphasized personal and government morality. But the sane part of Democracy ideology , a concept that’s full of universally value yet doesn’t seem to have the ability penalize modern aggressions of powerful country towards others poor and weak countries, case in point, US invasion of Iraq, Yemen etc. if Democracy is about freedom, whose freedom? United States independence of declaration, to the world is lopsided...”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Concept of Democracy should be reciprocal and mutual. No wonder America is viewed by third world a GONE case.
Payhole Everdouche Before we determine whether Political Science is a science or not, we first have to define what science is. Unfortunately, till this point there is no consensus on the definition and nature of science. For Newton science have to based upon facts and observations but contemprory theoretical physics is exact opposite of this conception of science. Therefore, in the end the only suitable definition of science is "the systematic study of nature". From this point of view Political Science is definitely a science.
Thanks for Uploading.
I love the cross fertilization Fukuyama uses with biology. Many social scientists are woefully ignorant of a field that is so central to understanding what makes us what we are.
J'aurais aimé entendre le point de vue de Francis Fukuyama sur les réformes politiques de Shinzo Abe sur :
- réinterprétation de l'article 9 de la constitution,
- possibilité d'exporter des armements,
- possibilité pour la force "self-defence" japonaise d'intervenir à l'étranger
Why all the vitriol and hate?
I find mr Fukuyama to be very thoughfull. And sure enough politics, economics and sociology can be viewed through the lens of science, why on earth not?
Some of the comments seem like the product of some deep offense being taken, something only a religious or religiously-like held belief or viewpoint could do.
I love the CFR! How can I help?
Democracy often ends up in chaos is bcoz ppl needs bread and butter more than ideology. And even if it does well, for instance in United Staes, but all is oblivious of fact that United States took 170 years before it became democratic. This is the ignorant part of the west academicians and Professor Fukuyama isn’t spared...More so with the help of technology such as internet services, notwithstanding peasants farmers from China are taken of the lands resulting in pent up frustrations or protests, that part of social conflicts have been substantially rectified, improved and amended with the help of technology. These sort of conflicts were hardly recognized nor improved earlier in China, but it has certainly changed in today’s era.
100 plus electorate countries, less than 10 % are admirable. India, Indonesia, Malaysia, EU, big failings in Africa, Egypt, and the so called perfect model, United States..etc, all are without problems. The few that are praiseworthy are South Korea, Japan and Singapore ( republic), those are of Confucianism emphasized personal and government morality. But the sane part of Democracy ideology , a concept that’s full of universally value yet doesn’t seem to have the ability penalize modern aggressions of powerful country towards others poor and weak countries, case in point, US invasion of Iraq, Yemen etc. if Democracy is about freedom, whose freedom? United States independence of declaration, to the world is lopsided...”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Concept of Democracy should be reciprocal and mutual. No wonder America is viewed by third world a GONE case.
Francis FUKUyama's ideas are about as appealing as Ear Wax!
Is Political Science, really a Science? Is Economics a real Science? Sociology?
Anyone?
Payhole Everdouche Before we determine whether Political Science is a science or not, we first have to define what science is. Unfortunately, till this point there is no consensus on the definition and nature of science. For Newton science have to based upon facts and observations but contemprory theoretical physics is exact opposite of this conception of science. Therefore, in the end the only suitable definition of science is "the systematic study of nature". From this point of view Political Science is definitely a science.
What a pseudo-intellectual!!! Cheap, poorly constructed ideas to suit weird hypothesis. Reminds me of some pakistani commentators.