On the Addressees of Political Knowledge

On the Addressees of Political Knowledge

Patrushev S.V.,

Cand. Sci. (Hist.), Leading Researcher, Head of the Department of Comparative Political Studies, Institute of Sociology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor of Russian Foreign Trade Academy, servpatrushev@gmail.com

elibrary_id: 72426 |

DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2016.05.13
Rubric: Feedback

For citation:

Patrushev S.V. On the Addressees of Political Knowledge. – Polis. Political Studies. 2016. No. 5. P. 152-159. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2016.05.13


The article is a response to the publication by M.E. Karyagin and A.Yu. Sungurov (“Polis. Political Studies”. 2016. No. 2). The author attempts to clarify some aspects of the institutional history of the Russian political science and notes that in the last two decades there has been a significant increment of knowledge about the formation of this field of research, starting from the last third of the nineteenth century to the present day. The article highlights the little-known pages of domestic specialists’ interaction with the International Political Science Association virtually since its inception. In the middle of the XX century the world political science community developed the set of criteria (that still retain their value) for evaluation of scientific content of political studies in different countries. These studies are marked by the diversity of directions, branches and national configurations, a variety of methodological and methodical approaches to research political phenomena. The author suggests that analysis of the relations of academic and expert communities and the factors of their differentiation and internal demarcation should be conducted not only in terms of “science-practice” or specialization at the academic market on researchers who are involved in science, on the one hand, and teachers employed mainly in the transmission of scientific knowledge, on the other hand, but also on the basis of differences in political and scientific-political views. The article questions the understanding of the object and subject of political science that leads to the logical assumption that a decline of authorities’ interest in scientific knowledge about politics makes political science unnecessary or, at best, substituted by practical expert knowledge. In contrast to this position, the hypothesis is proposed about civil society as a possible recipient of scientific and expert knowledge about politics.

political science; political science community; political knowledge; civil society; Russia.

Content No. 5, 2016

See also:

Karyagin M.E., Sungurov A.Yu.,
Contemporary Russian Political Science Community – the First Steps to the Analysis. – Polis. Political Studies. 2016. No2

Round Table of the «Polis» Journal, Gaman-Golutvina O.V., Avdonin V.S., Sergeyev S.A., Chernikova V.V., Sidenko O.A., Sokolov A.V., Evdokimov N.A., Tupaev A.V., Slatinov V.B., Zhukov I.K., Kozlova N.N., Rassadin S.V., Chugrov S.V.,
Regional political processes: how «subjective» are subjects of the RF. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No5

Yarulin I.F.,
Political Science in Russian Far East: Condition and Prospects. – Polis. Political Studies. 2004. No5

Smorgunov L.V.,
Political event analysis and its significance for modern comparative political studies. – Polis. Political Studies. 2011. No1

Krasin Yu.A.,
Russia's Political Self-Determination: Problems of Option. – Polis. Political Studies. 2003. No1



Introducing an article

Polis. Political Studies
2 2010

Chernikov M.V.
Capitalism on march. Where is the finish line?

 The article text


   2024      2023      2022      2021   
   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991