Scribd
Upload
101 views5 pages

Political Science

Behavioralism dominated political science for a decade but then theorists drifted away from applying scientific methods and lost focus on real world issues. This led to the rise of post-behavioralism, characterized by a call to make political science more relevant to solving social problems, recognize the influence of values, and take action toward positive social change rather than just observe. Post-behavioralists criticized behavioralism for being too technique-focused and not addressing important topics like justice, liberty and democracy.

Uploaded by

Ratul Sarkar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
101 views5 pages

Political Science

Behavioralism dominated political science for a decade but then theorists drifted away from applying scientific methods and lost focus on real world issues. This led to the rise of post-behavioralism, characterized by a call to make political science more relevant to solving social problems, recognize the influence of values, and take action toward positive social change rather than just observe. Post-behavioralists criticized behavioralism for being too technique-focused and not addressing important topics like justice, liberty and democracy.

Uploaded by

Ratul Sarkar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

INTRODUCTION

Behaviouralism dominated in the study of political Science for a decade.


However, the behviouralists drifted away from the path they had chosen
for themselves. They got absorbed in finding out new techniques and
methods for its study. In the process they lost the real subject matter.
They got divided into two groups – the Theoretical behaviouralists and
the positive behaviouralists. While the former laid emphasis purely on
theory building, the latter concerned themselves with finding out new
methods for the study of political phenomena. Consequently, certain
behaviouralists got disillusioned with behaviouralism towards the close
of sixties. The main attack upon behaviouralism came from David Easton
who was one of the leading behaviouralists. According to him, there is a
“post – behavioural revolution” underway which is born out of deep
dissatisfaction with the attempt to covert political study into a discipline
modelled on the methodology of the natural sciences. In their efforts at
research and application of scientific method, the behaviouralists had
gone far away from the realities of social behavior. In this way, political
science again lost touch with the current and contemporary issues.
Reasons for the growth of Post-Behaviouralism
The chief reasons for the growth of post-behaviouralism are- failure of
the behaviouralists in addressing the social problems for their solutions;
over-emphasis on research methods and tools, and consuming more
time on conceptualizing or theory-building.

Features of Post-Behaviouralism
Following are the characteristic features of post-
behaviouralism-
1. It is a movement of Protest. It is a protest against the wrong direction
which the behaviouralists had given to political science. As such, the
post-
behaviouralists stressed on “Relevance and Action”. They held that
political science should be directed towards solving actual problems. So
that it would be more relevant to the society. Political Scientists,
according to them, should once again try to view political situation as a
whole and in a right manner. They should deliberate on the basic issues
of society like justice, liberty, equality, democracy etc.

2. Opposition to ‘Value-free’ concept: David Easton, in his modification


says that “value are inextinguishable parts of the study of politics.
Science cannot be and never has been evaluatively neutral despite
protestations to the contrary. Hence to understand the limits of our
knowledge we need to be aware of the value premises on which it
stands and alternatives for which this knowledge could be used”.

3. Future-oriented (Predictability):
Post-behaviouralism wants that the behaviouralists should link their
empirical methods of research and approach for making theories that
could solve present and future social problems. It must thus be future
oriented. According to Easton, “Although the post-behavioural
revolution may have all appearances of just another reaction to
behaviouralism, it is infact notably different.

Behaviouralism was viewed as a threat to status quo ; classicism and


traditionalism…the post –behavioural revolution is, however, future
oriented. It does not seek to return to some golden age of political
research or to conserve to destroy a particular methodological
approach. It seeks rather to proper political science in new direction.”

4. It is an Intellectual tendency:
Post-behaviouralism is both a movement and intellectual
tendency. As a movement of protest, it has its followers among
all sections of political scientists “in all generations from young,
graduates to older members of the profession”. Easton says, it
was “a genuine revolution, not a reaction; a becoming, not a
preservation; a reform not a counter reformation.” It would be
wrong to identify post-behaviouralism with any particular
political ideology. The whole improbable diversity, political,
methodologicaland generational – was bound together by one
sentiment alone, a deep discontent with the direction of
contemporary political research.

David Easton, as such, speaks of the following as


important features of post-behaviouralism
1. Importance to substance over technique: Post-behaviouralists say, it
may be good to have sophisticated tools of investigation, but the more
important point is the purpose for which these tools are being applied.
Unless scientific research is relevant and meaningful for contemporary
social problems, it is not worth being undertaken.

2. Emphasis on social change and not social preservation.

3. Greater focus on Reality.

Political science should address the needs of mankind by identifying


the future social problems and by suggesting solutions to such problems.

4. Recognition of the existing values: According to post-behaviouralists,


unless values are regarded as the propelling force behind knowledge
there is a danger that knowledge would lose purposes. If knowledge is to
be used for right goals, values have to be
restored to the central position. Human values need protection.

5. It is Action-oriented:

Knowledge must be put to work. “To know”, as Easton points out “is to
bear the responsibility for acting, and to act is to engage in restoring
society”. The post-behaviouralists as such, ask for action-science in place
of
contemplative-science.

According to post-behaviouralists, once it is recognized that the


intellectuals have a positive role to play in society, and that this role is to
try to determine proper goals for society and make society move in the
direction of these goals, it becomes inevitable to politicize the
profession-all professional associations as well as universities thus
become not only inseparable but highly desirable.
Conclusion
Post-behaviouralists advocate that political science should be related
to urgent social problems. It should therefore be purposive. Political
scientists should find out solutions to contemporary problems. The
research should be relevant to the understanding of social issues.
Political scientists must play the leading role in acting for the post-
behavioural change. To quote Easton, ”the post-behavioural movement
in political science is presenting us with a new image of our discipline
and the obligations of our profession.”

You might also like