The Study Of Politics

If the study of politics is to be rewarding both intellectually and practically it must. by definition. concern itself with the great issues which arise in the real world and with the fundamental arguments which occur about their nature and the possible solutions to them. Abstract political philosophy which is not informed by the experi ence of practice will become sterile. A study of constitutions and the machinery of government can become dry-as-dust and hence boring unless the underlying principles are analysed and grasped. But theo ries of political change divorced from an understanding of consti tutions and institutions will degenerate into mere phrase-mongering. Attempts to apply the techniques of the natural sciences to politics will lead to model building for its own sake and thence to arid and barren intellectualism unless it is understood that it is impossible to quantify the intangible. Indeed. anyone-sided approach to politics and consequent failure to grasp the essential wholeness of the sub ject is bound to end in disaster. The study of politics is a study of changing human relationships in dynamic societies. Thus it involves. since the present and hence the future are shaped in part by the past. an appreciation of history.

The study of politics seems endlessly beset by debates about method. At the core of these debates is a single unifying concern: should political scientists view themselves primarily as scientists, developing ever more sophisticated tools and studying only those phenomena to which such tools may fruitfully be applied? Or should they instead try to illuminate the large, complicated, untidy problems thrown up in the world, even if the chance to offer definitive explanations is low? Is there necessarily a tension between these two endeavours? Are some domains of political inquiry more amenable to the building up of reliable, scientific knowledge than others, and if so, how should we deploy our efforts? In this book, some of the world's most prominent students of politics offer original discussions of these pressing questions, eschewing narrow methodological diatribes to explore what political science is and how political scientists should aspire to do their work.

Can politics be studied scientifically, and if so, how? Assuming it is impossible to justify values by human reason alone, social science has come to consider an unreflective relativism the only viable basis, not only for its own operations, but for liberal societies more generally. Although the experience of the sixties has made social scientists more sensitive to the importance of values, it has not led to a fundamental reexamination of value relativism, which remains the basis of contemporary social science. Almost three decades after Leo Strauss's death, Nasser Behnegar offers the first sustained exposition of what Strauss was best known for: his radical critique of contemporary social science, and particularly of political science. Behnegar's impressive book argues that Strauss was not against the scientific study of politics, but he did reject the idea that it could be built upon political science's unexamined assumption of the distinction between facts and values. Max Weber was, for Strauss, the most profound exponent of values relativism in social science, and Behnegar's explication artfully illuminates Strauss's critique of Weber's belief in the ultimate insolubility of all value conflicts. Strauss's polemic against contemporary political science was meant to make clear the contradiction between its claim of value-free premises and its commitment to democratic principles. As Behnegar ultimately shows, values—the ethical component lacking in a contemporary social science—are essential to Strauss's project of constructing a genuinely scientific study of politics.

Political science emerged as a response to the challenges of imperial administration and the demands of colonial rule. While not all political scientists were colonial cheerleaders, their thinking was nevertheless framed by colonial assumptions that influence the study of politics to this day. This book offers students a lens through which to decolonize the main themes and issues of political science - from human nature, rights, and citizenship, to development and global justice. Not content with revealing the colonial legacies that still inform the discipline, the book also introduces students to a wide range of intellectual resources from the (post)colonial world that will help them think through the same themes and issues more expansively. Decolonizing Politics is a much-needed critical guide for students of political science. It shifts the study of political science from the centers of power to its margins, where the majority of humanity lives. Ultimately, the book argues that those who occupy the margins are not powerless. Rather, marginal positions might afford a deeper understanding of politics than can be provided by mainstream approaches.​

In Politics as a Science, two of the world's leading authorities on Comparative Politics, Philippe C. Schmitter and Marc Blecher, provide a lively introduction to the concepts and framework to study and analyze politics. Written with dexterity, concision and clarity, this short text makes no claim to being scientific. It contains no disprovable hypotheses, no original collection of evidence and no search for patterns of association. Instead, Schmitter and Blecher keep the text broadly conceptual and theoretical to convey their vision of the sprawling subject of politics. They map the process in which researchers try to specify the goal of the trip, some of the landmarks likely to be encountered en route and the boundaries that will circumscribe the effort. Examples, implications and elaborations are included in footnotes throughout the book. Politics as a Science is an ideal introduction for anyone interested in, or studying, comparative politics. “The Open Access version of this book, available at http://www.taylorfrancis.com/doi/view/10.4324/9781003032144, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license.”

Excerpt from The Study of Politics: The Present State of American Political Science This essay is addressed to graduate students. My aim is to tell young men and young women some things it may be good to know about the profession they intend to enter. If old timers think they learn something also, they are welcome to whatever they pick up. If many older members of the profession read this, some of them will find confirmation of their own positions. They may even encounter some of their own ideas stated in their own words. For I have freely utilized what I have heard said over a period of at least three decades. I hope, of course, that I have myself added something to the discussion-if I have, it is not likely to sound new to men of my own age. I have not won any prizes for keeping my thoughts to myself over the years. But the young people, I have hope, will encounter a thing or two here they have not already pondered. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.

Scholars of politics have sought in recent years to make the discipline more hospitable to qualitative methods of research. Lauding the results of this effort and highlighting its potential for the future, Political Ethnography makes a compelling case for one such method in particular. Ethnography, the contributors amply demonstrate in a wide range of original essays, is uniquely suited for illuminating the study of politics. Situating these pieces within the context of developments in political science, Edward Schatz provides an overarching introduction and substantive prefaces to each of the volume’s four sections. The first of these parts addresses the central ontological and epistemological issues raised by ethnographic work, while the second grapples with the reality that all research is conducted from a first-person perspective. The third section goes on to explore how ethnographic research can provide fresh perspectives on such perennial topics as opinion, causality, and power. Concluding that political ethnography can and should play a central role in the field as a whole, the final chapters illuminate the many ways in which ethnographic approaches can enhance, improve, and, in some areas, transform the study of politics.

This book examines what political scientists are studying - and how they are doing it - in ways that could improve our world. It features scholars in political science and related fields, who are engaged in research that is more politically relevant than the work that continues to dominate the larger discipline. Their shared commitment "to make the study of politics relevant to the struggle for a better world" represents the continuing legacy of the Caucus for a New Political Science, founded in 1967, and the perestroika movement that began in 2000. Both have challenged the defining commitments of political science as a discipline to narrow, parochial, and apolitical approaches to the study of politics. Although the balance of disciplinary critique and alternative approach varies from chapter to chapter, all of the authors included here offer innovative and progressive perspectives on the study of politics today. Topics include: critiques of mainstream political science methods and models; redefinitions of key concepts and major institutions; reconstructions of the borders, subjects, and spaces of politics; and reflections on the ethical commitments of scholars and scholarly journals. This book was published as a special issue of New Political Science: A Journal of Politics and Culture.

In this thought-provoking book, Paulo Ravecca presents a series of interlocking studies on the politics of political science in the Americas. Focusing mainly on the cases of Chile and Uruguay, Ravecca employs different strands of critical theory to challenge the mainstream narrative about the development of the discipline in the region, emphasizing its ideological aspects and demonstrating how the discipline itself has been shaped by power relations. Ravecca metaphorically charts the (non-linear) transit from “cold” to “warm” to “hot” intellectual temperatures to illustrate his—alternative—narrative. Beginning with a detailed quantitative study of three regional academic journals, moving to the analysis of the role of subjectivity (and political trauma) in academia and its discourse in relation to the dictatorships in Chile and Uruguay, and arriving finally at an intimate meditation on the experience of being a queer scholar in the Latin American academy of the 21st century, Ravecca guides his readers through differing explorations, languages, and methods. The Politics of Political Science: Re-Writing Latin American Experiences offers an essential reflection on both the relationship between knowledges and politics and the political and ethical role of the scholar today, demonstrating how the study of the politics of knowledge deepens our understanding of the politics of our times.