Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Correspondence—Debate

Correspondence—Debate CorrespondenceDebate it stresses material related to that subject. I suppose if I wrote a book about the history of horses Veit- Brause would complain that I thought only things pertinent to horses occurred in history! Robert J . Goldstein Associate Professor Oakland University Rochester Michigan 9 November, 1985 To the Editor, I don’t know what to think about so impetuous a reaction of an author to a review of his book like Professor Goldstein’s. Parts of his letter confirm rather than dispel the reservations I expressed in my review. For example, the restriction to English language sources may have created even greater problems than I first suspected, considering that he has such difficulties with determining the gender of a non-English name. Goldstein reiterates ‘I am a political scientist,’ a fact my review mentioned. I see no point in this reminder, unless it implies a demand that his book be judged in accordance with the standards of his discipline. We shall see in a moment how political scientists have met this demand. But let me turn to more specific points. ( I ) The remarks in my review Goldstein contests most vehemently challenged his conceptual framework and the balance http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian Journal of Politics and History Wiley

Correspondence—Debate

Australian Journal of Politics and History , Volume 31 (3) – Dec 1, 1985
Download PDF
3 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/correspondence-debate-OuFlGIdlYZ

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0004-9522
eISSN
1467-8497
DOI
10.1111/j.1467-8497.1985.tb00144.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

CorrespondenceDebate it stresses material related to that subject. I suppose if I wrote a book about the history of horses Veit- Brause would complain that I thought only things pertinent to horses occurred in history! Robert J . Goldstein Associate Professor Oakland University Rochester Michigan 9 November, 1985 To the Editor, I don’t know what to think about so impetuous a reaction of an author to a review of his book like Professor Goldstein’s. Parts of his letter confirm rather than dispel the reservations I expressed in my review. For example, the restriction to English language sources may have created even greater problems than I first suspected, considering that he has such difficulties with determining the gender of a non-English name. Goldstein reiterates ‘I am a political scientist,’ a fact my review mentioned. I see no point in this reminder, unless it implies a demand that his book be judged in accordance with the standards of his discipline. We shall see in a moment how political scientists have met this demand. But let me turn to more specific points. ( I ) The remarks in my review Goldstein contests most vehemently challenged his conceptual framework and the balance

Journal

Australian Journal of Politics and History – Wiley

Published: Dec 1, 1985

There are no references for this article.