Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. Politics and the Life Sciences
  4. Most cited
Journal Home
Refine listing
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

Most cited

This page lists all time most cited articles for this title. Please use the publication date filters on the left if you would like to restrict this list to recently published content, for example to articles published in the last three years. The number of times each article was cited is displayed to the right of its title and can be clicked to access a list of all titles this article has been cited by.

Contents

Page 33 of 44

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • Can Biological, Toxin, and Chemical Warfare be Eliminated?

  • Meryl Nass
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 30-32

  • Is it possible to prevent biological, chemical, and toxin warfare from occurring? The Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), an international treaty banning the possession and hostile use of biological and toxin weapons, already exists; and a similar chemical weapons treaty is currently being negotiated. The older Geneva Protocol of 1925 bans the “first use” of these weapons in war. It might seem that the threat of use of these weapons of mass destruction is nearly at an end.

  • Cited by 1

  • Teaching Politics to Nurses

  • Terry Bristol
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 92-102

  • Nurses, as other life science students, have been prejudiced against politics, imagining that it only contaminates techno-scientific enterprises. However, the new, professional nurse is aware of the need for political understanding and political skills. The transformation of the socio-economic status of the health care industry from a social service to a business provides an excellent opportunity for introducing the nursing student to political thought in a positive conjunction with practical analysis.

    To generate a credible metapolitical framework, I embrace rather than avoid the current problems about the nature of the subject matter of politics. An aggressive, philosophically informed attack on the myth of autonomous, objective science opens the student's intellectual map of reality, and lays the groundwork for a proposed (paradoxical) complementarity of the two traditional models: politics as a science and politics as a humanity. This uncomfortable, middle ground position, abandoning any global Rationalism, again makes historical and contemporary case studies a relevant—in fact essential—part of political education. This is an effective approach to introducing the nursing student, whose education is dominated by classical, rationalistic, scientific images, to political studies.

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • Political Science, Social Organization, and Environment

  • Franco P. Rota
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 87-91

  • In Western Europe and especially West Germany, introducing a new approach in political science, biopolitics, is not an easy task. German political science has a very strong and effective philosophical tradition (Aristotle, Aquinas, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Weber), which separates it from the life sciences. Traditionally, political science is a theoretical branch of study, and politics is regarded principally as a rational process. Based on well-known historical experiences, German social scientists raise ideological objections to biology, and, with some exceptions (Flohr, 1979, 1983; Buhl, 1981, 1982), they neglect the findings of the life sciences. Political science mainly operates in a vacuum, adhering to the discipline's traditional monistic conceptions of what politics ought to be. Thus, in Germany the first problem is how to change monistic approaches and create a new kind of scientific conception of the world, one that is open and dynamic (Radnitzky, 1971) and able to integrate findings from the life sciences. Only then can biopolitical perspectives become anchored in the discipline. Thus, introducing biopolitics in Germany depends on a mental change, from traditional monistic conceptions to an open conception.

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • Back to the future Reflecting on the legacies of Lynton K. Caldwell, Robert H. Blank, and Andrea Bonnicksen

  • Amy L. Fletcher
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 65-70

  • Reviewing the work of Lynton Caldwell, Robert Blank, and Andrea Bonnicksen is both a privilege and a challenge. These three scholars rank among the key figures in the development of biopolicy as a legitimate research and teaching subfield within political science. Each of them worked in academia, on significant bioethical advisory boards, and with policymaking entities, and also contributed to numerous externally funded research projects. Across long and prolific careers, Caldwell, Blank, and Bonnicksen engaged seriously with the political, social and ethical issues raised by significant advances in many bio-scientific domains. This essay analyzes several of their works across two broad themes: 1) the development of the subfields of biopolitics and biopolicy, and 2) the tension between science policy and democratic governance. While each of them wrote significant and well-received books, the focus here is on insights to be gleaned from an idiosyncratic selection of their scholarly articles across the time period, 1966 to 2007. To borrow Michel Foucault's term, this brief and necessarily selective archaeology of the published journal record nevertheless demonstrates the significance, durability and prescience of the authors' insights. (I expect that at least one, if not all three, of these authors might raise objections to the mention of Foucault, but the term “archaeology” in this instance is apt.)

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • Report from the Curriculum Committee

  • Fred Kort
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 88-91
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation
  • Cited by 1

  • Teaching Biopolitics

  • Roger Masters
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, p. 91
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation
  • Cited by 1

Page 33 of 44