Contemporary Approach:
Attempt to establish separate identity of Political Science to try to understand politics in its totality comprises: behavioural, post behavioural approach:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Power :
Machiavelli, Hobbes, Nietzche, Man Weber, Catlin, Laswell, Kaplan, Watkins Trietschke, Morgenthau.
i. Emphasis on format as well as informed centre.
ii. Even Marxists emphasis that differ from liberals under location of the centre of power.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Behaviouralism:
i. Believes that observing the outward behaviour of political outer and political institutions and analyzing their behaviour by scientific method can acquire the knowledge of political system.
ii. Draws heavily from sociology and psychology. Factors Responsible
iii. Concept of General System Theory of Ludvig Von Bert pioneered at unification of sciences (Biologists).
ADVERTISEMENTS:
iv. Logical positivism popularly known as Vienna circles in 1920’s-everything that was over and beyond experience.
v. Linguistic philosophy-T.D. Weldons ‘Vocabulary of Politics, Peter Laslett, Bertrand Russell, A.N. Whitsheed. Only those statements or propositions which could be conclusively verified or falsified by empirical means could be regarded as genuine.
Origin is traced to:
i. Graham Wales-Human Nature in Politics 1942.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
ii. Arthur Benthey-the process of Government, 1908.
iii. Charles Merriam is regarded as intellectual god father of behavioural political science.
iv. Present state of the Study of Politics APSR (1921) . New Aspects of Politics-1925
v. Merriam emphasized renewed scientific endeavour and need for a policy sciences by using quantitative techniques already developed in Psychology and Sociology.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
vi. G.E.G. Catlin-Science and Method of Politics (1927) advanced case produce see pure science.
vii. Laswells-Politics: who gets what, when, how? Proved a Landmark in empirical approach to politics as study and analysis of power.
viii. To Eulan the root is man.
ix. To Kirkpatrik, behaviouralism is a revolution.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
x. To Easton it called for methodological rigour and empirical theory.
xi. To Dahl it manifests a mood which calls for greater unity between empirical political studies and concern for general theory.
By second half of 1960’s behaviouralism became an accepted face.
Its focus is individual person, rather than the group or the political system but it necessarily takes account of the influences of the growth on the individual’s behaviour, (Sociological and Psychological).
They advocate a new method. They insist on survey research.
Their method is interdisciplinary. Major Tenets
Easton has identified eight major tenets which he regards as ‘intellectual foundation stones’ on movement is constructed:
i. Regularities: discoverable uniformities that can be expressed in theory like statements for expectation and prediction.
ii. Verification: each generalisation must be testable by observation.
iii. Techniques: self-conscious selection refined and validated mean. For observing, recording and analysing pet behaviour.
iv. Quantification: unless it is done, it would be impossible to obtain precise and accurate knowledge.
v. Values: objective scientific inquiry has to be value free or value neutral.
vi. Systematization: research must be theory oriented and theory directed.
vii. Pure Science: knowledge would be utilized in the solution of urgent practical problems of society.
viii. Integration: to them man is a social animal, so political research was to take into account the findings of other disciplines.
Behaviouralist achievement by the theory building and techniques of research (greatest in sample survey).
Focused on micro level situations rather than attempting macro level generalizations. It is poorer. When it comes to institutions and processes whose data cannot be quantified. In place of state they coined the term political system consisting of all things associated with political process.
Critics of Behaviouralism:
Leo Stranes in ‘what is political philosophy’ (Journal of Politics 1957) argued that the rise of behaviouralism was symptomatic of a crisis in D. T. because of its failure to come to grips with the normative issues.
Sheldon Wolin in ‘Political Theory as Vocation’ APSR, 1969 declared that preoccupation of Political Science with method signifies an abdication of true vocation of Political Theory.
Thomas Kuhnis ‘The Structure of Scientific Revolution’ (1962) had promoted the view that significance of scientific method lies in its capacity of problem solving and crisis management, not in methodological sophistication.
By 1960s end, even exponents undivided that strict adherence to pure science was meeting failures.