Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:26:45.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

LA TEORIA POLITICA DELL'ANALISI DEI SISTEMI: DAVID EASTON

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2018

Introduzione

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Nato, il 24 giugno del 1917, e cresciuto in Canada, David Easton ha completato la sua formazione universitaria all'Università di Toronto (B.A. nel 1939, M.A. nel 1943). La sua successiva carriera accademica è legata a tre delle più importanti università americane, Harvard, Chicago e la University of California. Nel 1947 ha conseguito il Ph. D. ad Harvard, dove era teaching fellow dal 1944. Per quasi un quarto di secolo è stato uno dei più eminenti scienziati politici della University of Chigago (1947-1982), dove divenne full professor nel 1955 e fu nominato Andrei MacLeish Distinguished Service Professor nel 1969. Nel 1981 entrò a far parte del Department of Politics and Society della University of California ad Irvine, dove insegna ancora oggi. Non è possibile, nei limiti di quest'articolo, ricapitolare tutte le sue cariche accademiche, partecipazioni a comitati editoriali, o i suoi incarichi come consulente politico. Basti dire che è stato Presidente della American Political Science Association (1968-89), e membro e vicepresidente della American Academy of Arts and Sciences (1985-88). David Easton ha ricevuto tre lauree ad honorem (dalla McMaster University, dal Kalamazoo College e dalla Free University of Berlin).

Summary

Summary

David Easton's effort in theory construction was motivated mainly by his critical assessment of historicism and empiricism - approaches which have dominated political science in the Fifties. This criticism which, at that time, he shared with other political scientists finally resulted in what came to be known as «behavioralism». Beha-vioralism stressed theory-led empiricism as well as empirically grounded theory formation. Easton himself developed a general theory of politics which was always related to and helpful for empirical research. He called this general theory also a framework which was suited to integrate partial theories of politics. The basic concept of Easton's systems analysis of politics is the political system. The political system is understood as a system of interaction through which authoritative allocations are made and implemented for the society. The point of reference of Easton's theory is the idea of the persistence of the political system. It is assumed that political systems want to persist. The issue of persistence can be regarded as the most inclusive and fundamental goal for any political system. In the context of his systems theory of political life David Easton developed concepts which in a very short time have become part and parcel of contemporary political science. They include concepts such as specific and diffuse support as well as demands which designate fundamental «input» categories of the political process and categories such as political community, political regime and political authorities which characterize the basic objects of a political system. There is no doubt about his monumental impact on the theoretical and empirical development of contemporary political science.

Type
Saggi
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 by Società editrice il Mulino, Bologna 

References

Riferimenti bibliografici

Almond, G. (1980), The Intellectual History of the Civic Culture Concept, in G. Almond e S. Verba (a cura di), in The Civic Culture Revisited, Boston-Toronto, Little & Brown, pp. 136.Google Scholar
Almond, G. (1997), The Political System and Comparative Politics. The Contribution of David Easton, in K. Renwick Monroe (a cura di), Contemporary Empirical Political Theory, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London, University of California Press, pp. 219230.Google Scholar
Almond, G. e Powell, B. (a cura di) (1988), Comparative Politics Today. A World View, Boston-London, Little & Brown; trad, it., Politica comparata, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1970.Google Scholar
Brewer, G.D. e De Leon, P. (1983), The Foundations of Policy-Analysis, Homewood, Ill.Google Scholar
Crozier, M., Huntington, S. e Watanuki, J. (1975), The Crisis of Democracy, New York, New York University Press; trad. it. La crisi della democrazia, Milano, Angeli, 1977.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. (1989), Democracy and Its Critics, New Haven-London, Yale University Press; trad. it. La democrazia e I suoi critici, Roma, Editori Riuniti, 1990.Google Scholar
Easton, D. (1951), The Decline of Modem Political Theory, in «Journal of Politics», vol. 13, pp. 3658; ristampato in J.A. Gould e V. Thursby (a cura di) (1969), Contemporary Political Thought, Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Easton, D. (1953), The Political System: An Inquiry into the State of Political Science, New York, Alfred A. Knopf, trad it. Il sistema politico, Milano, Comunità, 1973.Google Scholar
Easton, D. (1965a), A Framework for Political Analysis, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall; trad. it. L'analisi sistemica della politica, Casale Monferrato, Marietti, 1984.Google Scholar
Easton, D. (1965b), A Systems Analysis of Political Life, New York, John Wiley.Google Scholar
Easton, D. (1969), The New Revolution in Political Science, in «The American Political Science Review», 63, pp. 10511061.Google Scholar
Easton, D. (1975), A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support, in «British Journal of Political Science», 5, pp. 453457.Google Scholar
Easton, D. (1990), The Analysis of Political Structure, New York, Routledge; trad. it. L'analisi della struttura politica, Soveria Mannelli, Rubbettino, 2001.Google Scholar
Easton, D. e Dennis, J. (1969), Children in the Political System. Origins of Political Legitimacy, New York, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Falter, J. (2001), Behaviorism, Political, in Smelser, N. J. (a cura di), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 26 voll., Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Fuchs, D. (1993a), A Metatheorie of the Democratic Process, Discussionpaper Fs III, pp. 93203, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (Wzb), Berlin.Google Scholar
Fuchs, D. (1993 b), Trends of Political Support in the Federal Republic of Germany, in D. Berg-Schlosser e R. Rytlewski (a cura di), Political Culture in Germany, London, MacMillan, pp. 232268.Google Scholar
Fuchs, D. (1999), The Democratic Culture of Germany, in Norris, P. (a cura di), Critical Citizens. Global Support for Democratic Government, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 123145.Google Scholar
Fuchs, D. (2002), Das Konzept der politischen Kultur: Die Fortsetzung einer Kontroverse in konstruktivistischer Abschicht, in Fuchs, D., Roller, E. e Wessels, B. (a cura di), Bürger und Demokratie in Ost und West. Studien zur politischen Kultur und zum politischen Prozeβ, Festschrift für Hans-Dieter Klingemann, Wiesbaden, Westdeutscher Verlag, pp. 2749.Google Scholar
Green, D.P. e Shapiro, I. (1994), Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory. A Critique of Applications in Political Science, New Haven-London, Yale University Press.Google Scholar
King, A. (1976), Why is Britain Becoming Harder to Govern?, London, British Broadcasting Corporation.Google Scholar
Klingemann, H.D. (1999), Mapping Political Support in the 1990's: A Global Analysis, in P. Norris (a cura di), Critical Citizens. Global Support for Democratic Government, cit., pp. 3156.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N. (1970), Soziologie des politischen Systems, in Id., Soziologische Aufklärung. Aufsätze zur Theorie sozialer Systeme, vol. I, Opladen, Westdeutscher Verlag, pp. 154177; trad. it. Sociologia dei sistemi politici, in Illuminismo sociologico, Milano, Il Saggiatore, 1983, pp. 179-204.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N. (1984), Soziale Systeme. Grundriss einer allgemeinen Theorie, Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp; trad. it., Sistemi sociali. Fondamenti di una teoria generale, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1990.Google Scholar
Miller, E.F. (1971), David Easton's Political Theory, in «The Political Science Review», 1, pp. 184235.Google Scholar
Parsons, T. (1969), Politics and Social Structure, New York, London; trad. it. Sistema politico e struttura sociale, Milano, Giuffrè, 1975.Google Scholar
Parsons, T. (1971), The System of Modem Societies, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall; trad. it. Sistemi di società, 2 voll., Bologna, Il Mulino, vol. II, Le società moderne, 1973.Google Scholar
Parsons, T. e Shils, E. (1951), Toward a General Theory of Action, Cambridge, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rohrschneider, R. (1999), Learning Democracy. Democratic and Economic Values in Unified Germany, Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rose, R. (1979), Pervasive Problems of Governing: An Analytic Framework, in J. Matthes (a cura di), Sozialer Wandel in West-Europa, Frankfurt-New York, Campus, pp. 2954.Google Scholar
Rose, R., Mishler, W. e Haerpfer, C. (1998), Democracy and Its Alternatives, Oxford, Polity Press.Google Scholar
Windhoff-Héritier, A. (1987), Policy-Analyse. Eine Einführung, Frankfurt am Main. Campus.Google Scholar