Search results

This research purpose was to explore the meaning of historicism, architectural historicism, the architectural attributes, design principles, elements and ornamentations of churches in medieval Western architecture, and how they were reflected in contemporary churches' design in Jordan.

This research used the historical descriptive–interpretive qualitative research method. Around 24 Western medieval churches were selected, studied and analyzed to explore the common design attributes of each historical era. The design attributes of each era were segmented under three categories: Design principles (plans' typology, facades, shapes, details, composition and building form), design elements (openings, towers and entrances) and ornamentation (sculptures, paintings and interior decoration). Additionally, three modern Jordanian churches were analyzed using the same method to compare with the historical churches through personal observations, field trips, researchers' memories, site visits, archival records, plans, images, books, slides, details and note-making. Different types of evidence were used, such as determinate, contextual and inferential. In addition, different tactics for analysis were used in analyzing the historical churches: site familiarity, use of existing documents, virtual and visual inspection and comparison with conditions elsewhere. Credibility was achieved when the results were reviewed and compared with the original and similar information.

Early Christian design principles, elements and ornamentations were reflected in Jordanian churches more than in Byzantine, Renaissance, Romanesque and Gothic. The design principles of Western medieval architecture were reflected in the selected Jordanian churches more than in ornamentation and design elements. Moreover, this research found that the highest reflection of Western medieval architecture on Jordanian churches was in designing the plans, which is a basilica with a central nave and aisles followed by opening styles, façade, shapes, entrances design, composition, painting and the minimum reflection was in sculptures. Additionally, there was no reflection on tower design and interior decoration.

This research encourages architects to enhance architectural historicism by focusing on historical styles in contemporary designs and using design elements, principles and decorations of historical styles in medieval architecture to enrich the variety and originality of architectural design and create new modern stylistic architecture. Architectural historicism increases historical self-awareness and helps a generation of architects to answer the question: In what style should be built.

Learning the design principles, not copying the past, is becoming a trend for most architects. Architectural historicism introduces new temporal elements, gives a new meaning and primary function to architecture to become socio-temporal and contextual contrast and reflects the essential points of references of the past through design methodology to express the present. The advantage of this research is to put an end to architects' role in syncretism and subjectivism. Instead, historicism architects equipped with the necessary knowledge and supported by the published research and inventors of historical architecture, can choose, imitate, adapt, borrow and use the correct historical forms that originated in a given period.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive analysis of methodological issues that accompany the articles reviewing past research in strategic management.

The topic of the philosophical underpinnings and implications of historicism in strategy reviews is examined by contrasting and explaining deterministic, indeterministic, and underdeterministic views of strategy's intellectual history.

Three diverse philosophical approaches to historicist interpretation are found to be embedded in key review articles in the field of strategic management.

This paper indicates the need to develop and teach an accepted methodology of systematically reviewing and interpreting available knowledge in strategic management.

The unique contribution of this paper is that it indicates new paths that are important not only for the development of an alternative way to construct a shared history of the subject but also for the development of common norms for review articles that could help to advance strategic management scholarship.

The author applies methodological concepts from The Poverty of Historicism to contemporary research in the area of entrepreneurship. This paper aims to explain why current theoretic models do not adequately explain entrepreneurial phenomena and to present outlines of a distinct entrepreneurship research paradigm.

The author examines the essay from the perspective of a historian and then summarizes its concepts. Next, the author reviews the current state of entrepreneurship research and theory and applies concepts from the essay to its contemporary challenges. Finally, the author presents five implications.

The five implications are that entrepreneurship research should include designs that predict failure, strive to develop theory that is distinct from other areas, emphasize novel arrangements of empirical elements that are also novel, utilize nonparametric statistics and case studies more fully, and push for a paradigmatic shift.

The contribution of this paper is useful to entrepreneurship scholars interested in developing and distinguishing their research area in a substantial and lasting way alongside other established research areas in the domain of business studies.

This chapter investigates the, often neglected or confused, role that History plays within Austrian Economics, and suggests ways that the former can inform the latter. Relying mostly on the work of Ludwig von Mises, the chapter explores the apparent contradictions between an a posteriori discipline like History and an a priori field like economics, and argues that they are nevertheless necessary intellectual complements of each other.

The purpose of this paper is to examine processes of Eurasian integration and the veritable ‘culture war’ between Russia and the West over it, while contributing to the theoretical paradigm of geopolitical economy. This paradigm invites us to consider the multiple manifestations of an emerging multipolar world order while scrutinising the extent to which previously popular approaches to the study of international political economy were themselves enmeshed in projects, the architects of which aspired to global hegemony.

The paper employs critical historicism, an approach in which cultural difference is seen as the sedimentation of historically constituted material and ideational processes and which eschews cultural essentialism and orientalising tropes. It is through this lens that Russian state attempts at normalising Eurasian integration processes are examined.

I demonstrate that Russian state organs and officials, as well as ‘political technologists’ attempt to de-politicise processes of Eurasian integration by appealing to both the logic of cultural/civilisational compatibility of affected parties, as well as the logic of economic integration. Such portrayals invite scrutiny; however, it is important that we also consider how Eurasian integration initiatives are the product of a post-Soviet struggle over Eurasian space but represent something more than mere neo-Soviet revisionism.

The paper demonstrates its originality by situating ongoing processes of Eurasian integration within the longer post-Soviet conjuncture and amid processes of international contestation. Moreover, it situates Russian officials and political technologists as active contributors to international debates about the emerging multipolar world order.

I have taken this essay on Mark Bevirʼs latest book as an opportunity to critically reflect on diverse perspectives within radical democratic theory. My first aim here is to simply describe Bevirʼs historical and interpretive account of governance in general, interdisciplinary terms. My second aim is the more specific, disciplinary one of comparing the scholarly contributions of Mark Bevirʼs Democratic Governance with those of Chantal Mouffeʼs The Democratic Paradox and Archon Fungʼs Empowered Participation, two influential publications in contemporary political theory. I conclude by discussing the relative powers and limits of Bevirʼs genealogical, Mouffeʼs deconstructive, and Fungʼs procedural approaches to radical democratic theory.

Sociologists studying the rise of postmodernism have generally concentrated on either macro-level structures of economy or micro-level subjectivities of individuals. Few have specified how meso-level actions within concrete institutions have produced both these macro- and micro-changes. Bourdieu's concept of field provides a meso-level concept that allows sociologists to explain the transition to a postmodern society by changes in the composition and competition of producers and consumers struggling for advantage in the economy and culture. The chapter focuses on architecture, revealing that the rise of a postmodern aesthetic was the result of internal changes of this field and their complex interrelation with the external changes of an economy in transition from Fordism to post-Fordism.

This paper aims to counter the view that Marshall was an opponent of the historical school. This false account has survived and prospered because it has fitted into more general conceptions of intellectual history, held by both orthodox and heterodox economists.

Marshall's affinity with the historical school is established by examining his writings and his relationship with historical school sympathisers in the UK.

It is established that Marshall regarded his work as building on historical school insights, and he repeatedly referred positively to the ideas of the German historical school. It is argued in this paper that Marshall's opposition to the historical school was confined to its anti‐theoretical wing, principally Cunningham. In other important respects Marshall's position was compatible with German and British historicism.

In preceding literature, Marshall's affinities with the historical school have been denied, unacknowledged, or unexplored.

Roscher believed that human existence is rooted in organic nature. In his view, a national society can be regarded as an organism in which households function as mutually dependent organs. Examines the nature of Roscher′s organicism, which to a certain extent is characteristic of the historical school through its link with historicism. Outlines the roots and development of Roscher′s organicism. Considers the related ideas of other economic theorists.

Michael E. Brown's book, The Concept of the Social in Uniting the Humanities and Social Sciences, demonstrates that prominent attempts to account for the social dimension of human affairs rely on an unstated notion of a “course of activity,” that is diametrically opposed to the conceptualization of sociality that is presumably intended to realize it. I want to focus on the idea of a “course of activity” in order to locate his work in and clarify its importance to the development of dialectical reason from Heraclitus through Hegel and beyond. Of special importance is the bearing of his research on the critique of contemporary theories of agency and sociality, and, since considerable attention has been paid, in this regard, to the arts and humanities, some of what I will say about this refers to art and its avant-garde moments—-particularly in my work on Dada and Brown's account of two avant-garde theatrical performances. 

This chapter examines what is entailed by separating agency from individuality and what it means for the idea of a “course of activity,” (going on) and its relation to the concept of sociality. This also bears on questions of ontology, as Brown's course of activity is generative and nonrepeatable. The course of activity and nonrepeatability are linked to both avant-garde practice and theoretical notions that reframe our temporal understandings. These include the avant-garde of dada and surrealism, and the reformulations of bourgeois time of Jean Duvignaud, Walter Benjamin, Ernst Bloch, and Jean-Paul Sartre. The question raised here is that of a teleological understanding—how we link the present course of activity with future events.