Applies complexity science to the study of international politics. Why did some countries transition peacefully from communist rule to political freedom and market economies; while others did not? Why did the United States enjoy a brief moment as the sole remaining superpower; and then lose power and influence across the board? What are the prospects for China; the main challenger to American hegemony? In Complexity Science and World Affairs; Walter C. Clemens Jr. demonstrates how the basic concepts of complexity science can broaden and deepen the insights gained by other approaches to the study of world affairs. He argues that societal fitness—the ability of a social system to cope with complex challenges and opportunities—hinges heavily on the values and way of life of each society; and serves to explain why some societies gain and others lose. Applying theory to several rich case studies; including political developments across post–Soviet Eurasia and the United States; Clemens shows that complexity science offers a powerful set of tools for advancing the study of international relations; comparative government; and; more broadly; the social sciences.
#504980 in Books 2015-06-01Original language:English 5.91 x 1.89 x 8.86l; 1.28 #File Name: 0143425234
Review
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful. The Sanskrit Epic Completed in Translation with a Tenth VolumeBy Burt ThorpIf you wish to read the entire "Mahabharata" from start to finish in English translation; there are at present only two readily available choices: the ten-volume translation by Bibek Debroy being reviewed here and the late-nineteenth century translation known usually as the Ganguli-Roy version originally published in Calcutta. This older translation has been reprinted and can also be found online. I'm referring to complete translations; since there are quite a few abridgements; translations of selected passages; summaries; and retellings. (There was another old complete translation by Dutt; since reprinted; which I have sampled but found to be unreadable.) Then there is the in-progress translation published by the University of Chicago Press; begun by van Buitenen and being completed by various scholars who hold positions at universities. Debroy worked on his translation during "time stolen in the evenings and over the weekends" as he writes. Does it matter? Only in the sense that it explains the way Debroy presents his translation with minimal notes and brief introduction; while the Chicago translation presents extensive apparatus dealing with points of historical and scholarly interest. Debroy also does not use the scholarly transliteration of Sanskrit names; so no diacritical marks. I don't mean this as a criticism of Debroy; just pointing out the different audiences for the two works. A similarity between Debroy and Chicago: they both use the Sanskrit text established by V. Sukthankar and other editors and published at Poona by the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute; 1933-1966 (the first fascicle was actually published in 1927; I believe). This critical edition turns out to be somewhat shorter than older editions; since passages are relegated to the footnotes and appendices which do not have full manuscript support. Both Debroy and Chicago; of course; do not translate the additional passages; some of them may be found translated in Ganguli-Roy. What about Debroy's translation? It is certainly readable and in that sense better than older translations which suffer from problems of diction: the use of old fashioned words and phrases in an attempt to sound profound; I guess. One thing to understand about the Sanskrit of the epic: it is generally not too difficult; except for occasional passages that are obscure; probably because they were not well preserved in the manuscript tradition. The audience the epic was aimed at was more popular; it seems; than; for example; Kalidasa's poems. When one looks at the Sanskrit original and compares Debroy's rendition; it is usually clear how he arrived at his translation--his is no retelling or paraphrase. If the translators of the Chicago version look at Debroy; I imagine they may find places in which they disagree with him. Debroy is to be commended for completing such a huge task essentially on his own and in his spare time! This and the other volumes are nicely printed in large font.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Item as expectedBy Rebecca SchallItem as expected0 of 1 people found the following review helpful. Excellent edition.By harold d waltersSuperb and indispensable translation. Excellent edition.
