Quote:
Originally Posted by Phanuthier
Coming from a science (chem, phys, bio) background, how does research differ from "industry" in Poli Sci?
For instance, in engineering, you have reserach being done in something like spintronics so your computer can store more memory in a smaller volume, and you have industry where you use electronics (CMOS to be more exact) to store more memory in a smaller volume. Spintronics being the new, unknown realm of science, and CMOS design and packing it smaller being a known science, but taking various developments in processing to get something new.
To me, I've always thought research was something new and never been done before, and application of knowledge was "industry" (in engineering terms).
Is there that kind of difference in Poli Sci between reserach and application?
Reading Dr Huebert's profile and his publications, something like New Challenges to Canadian Arctic Security and Sovereignty seems like something "new" (although difficult for someone who's been strictly science to grasp research vs. application) while To Secure a Nation: Canadian Defence and Security in the 21st Century seems more opinionated, and something more "application"
|
Ultimately, you have two types of research in political science. Philosophical research, strictly for the purpose of academia and philosophical/imperative research, strictly for the purpose of answering policy questions.
A good comparison would be a glimpse of the difference between my Honours Thesis and my friends.
He's writing on the "Good Life", comparing Karl Marx and Aristotle. Purely theoretical, not much practical application beyond studying the power of ideas. Which by itself is quite practical.
Mine is an examination of human political nature in terms of socio-biological research and how that perception of human nature can create effective environmental policy for Canada.