Chapter3 - Summary
Chapter3 - Summary
Chapter3 - Summary
CHAPTER 3
1. **Meta-methodological Concepts**:
Meta-method is the study of extant scientific methods. It is a rigorous form of meta-level
research where the subject matter is other research methods.
- The section introduces meta-methodological concepts in political science, which
encompass traditions, subfields, and doctrines. Traditions like behavioralism, rational
choice, and institutionalism are recognized in the discipline, but the text highlights the
potential for confusion when debates are framed solely within these traditions.
- **Traditions vs. Philosophical Ideas**: While traditions may appear coherent, they often
contain diverse and evolving philosophical ideas that may not logically align. Meta-
methodology aims to unpack these traditions to reveal the specific philosophical doctrines
associated with them.
- **Philosophical Subfields**: The text discusses how meta-methodological concepts
also refer to philosophical subfields like epistemology (theory of knowledge) and ontology
(theory of existence). It emphasizes that any political methodology inherently involves
philosophical commitments, which are often left implicit by political scientists.
- **Importance of Reflection**: Meta-methodology encourages explicit reflection on
philosophical issues and their implications for political science research. By thinking
critically about underlying philosophical assumptions, researchers can enhance the clarity
and rigor of their methodologies.
- **Diverse Philosophical Positions**: The section acknowledges the multitude of
philosophical positions that individuals may adopt in political science research. It stresses
the need for explicit consideration of these positions to ensure consistency and coherence
in methodological approaches.
In essence, the "Meta-methodological Concepts" section underscores the importance of
moving beyond traditional labels in political science and delving into the specific
philosophical ideas that underpin research methodologies. By promoting explicit reflection
on philosophical subfields and diverse positions, meta-methodology aims to enhance the
intellectual rigor and coherence of political science research practices.
2. **Traditions of Political Science**:
- This section explores the various traditions that have shaped political science research
and methodology. It delves into the philosophical underpinnings of key traditions such as
Modernist Empiricism, Behavioralism, Institutionalism, Rational Choice, and Political
Science Today.
- **Modernist Empiricism**: Modernist Empiricism has been highlighted as a dominant
orientation in political science since the early twentieth century. It is characterized by
atomistic and analytic approaches that emphasize formal, ahistorical explanations
through classifications, correlations, and systems. Modernist Empiricism breaks away
from historical narratives and focuses on discrete units and formal structures for
understanding political phenomena.
- **Rational Choice**: Rational Choice theory posits that individuals make rational
decisions based on their preferences and available information. This tradition applies
economic principles to political analysis, emphasizing individual utility maximization and
strategic behavior. Rational Choice theorists seek to explain political outcomes through the
rational actions of individuals and groups.
- **Political Science Today**: The section reflects on the current landscape of political
science, highlighting the continued influence of empiricist epistemology, realist ontology,
and formal modes of explanation. It raises questions about the evolution of philosophical
thinking in political science and the need to reconsider outdated meta-methodological
frameworks.
In summary, the "Traditions of Political Science" section provides a comprehensive
overview of key traditions in political science, including Modernist Empiricism,
Behavioralism, Institutionalism, Rational Choice, and reflections on the state of Political
Science Today. Each tradition o ers unique perspectives and methodologies for studying
political phenomena, contributing to the diverse and evolving landscape of political
science research.
3. **Epistemology**:
- This section delves into the philosophical study of knowledge and how it is acquired in
political science research. It explores various theories and concepts that underpin
epistemological considerations in the field.
- **Confirmation Theory**: Confirmation theory, associated with the logical positivists,
focuses on how evidence can confirm scientific theories. It seeks to provide a logical
framework for understanding the process by which evidence supports or confirms
hypotheses and theories in political science research.
- **Falsificationism**: Falsificationism is a theory of science proposed by philosopher
Karl Popper, which emphasizes the importance of falsifiability in scientific hypotheses. In
political science, falsificationism encourages researchers to test theories by seeking
evidence that could potentially refute them, promoting rigorous and empirical testing of
hypotheses.
- **Meaning Holism**: Meaning holism challenges traditional views of knowledge by
emphasizing the interconnectedness of beliefs and concepts. In the context of political
science, meaning holism questions the reliance on inductive or experimental empiricism,
realism, and formal explanations, suggesting a need for a more holistic approach to
understanding political phenomena.
- **Bayesianism**: Bayesianism is a theory of probability that involves updating beliefs
based on new evidence. In political science, Bayesian approaches can be used to model
uncertainty, revise hypotheses, and make predictions based on evolving information and
data.
- **Comparing Theories**: The section discusses the importance of comparing and
evaluating di erent theories in political science. By assessing the strengths and
weaknesses of competing theories, researchers can refine their understanding of political
phenomena and develop more robust explanations for observed patterns and behaviors.
- **Issues for Political Science**: The section raises critical issues for political science
research, including the problem of induction, the challenge of justifying generalizations
based on past observations, and the need to consider how evidence supports theories.
These epistemological challenges prompt political scientists to reflect on the methods and
approaches used in their research.
In summary, the "Epistemology" section provides a comprehensive exploration of key
theories and concepts related to the acquisition of knowledge in political science. From
confirmation theory to falsificationism and Bayesianism, these epistemological
frameworks o er valuable insights into how researchers approach the study of political
phenomena and evaluate competing theories in the field. The section also highlights
critical issues and challenges that shape epistemological considerations in political
science research.
4. **Ontology**:
- This section delves into the philosophical study of being and existence in political
science research, exploring di erent ontological perspectives and their implications for
understanding political phenomena.
- **Naive Realism**: Naive Realism is a common belief that objects and entities exist
independently of our perceptions or beliefs about them. In political science, Naive Realism
suggests that social and political realities have an inherent structure that exists regardless
of human interpretation or understanding.
- **Ontological Commitment**: Ontological Commitment refers to the philosophical
stance that researchers take regarding the existence of certain entities or phenomena in
their study. Political scientists make ontological commitments when they assert the
existence of specific social structures, institutions, or processes as fundamental to their
research.
- **Constructivism**: Constructivism challenges the idea of objective reality by
emphasizing the role of human interpretation and social construction in shaping our
understanding of the world. In political science, constructivist approaches highlight how
social and political phenomena are constructed through language, discourse, and shared
meanings.
- **Issues for Political Science**: The section raises critical issues for political science
research related to ontology, including debates about the nature of existence, the status of
abstract concepts, and the modes of being in social and political contexts. These
ontological questions prompt researchers to reflect on the assumptions they make about
the nature of reality and the implications for their study of political phenomena.
In summary, the "Ontology" section provides a comprehensive exploration of key
ontological perspectives in political science research. From Naive Realism to
Constructivism, these ontological frameworks o er valuable insights into how researchers
conceptualize the existence of social and political entities and the implications for
understanding political phenomena. The section also highlights critical issues and
challenges that shape ontological considerations in political science research, prompting
researchers to critically examine their ontological commitments and assumptions about
the nature of reality in their studies.
5. **Forms of Explanation**:
- This section explores di erent approaches to explaining political phenomena and
events, focusing on various theories and frameworks used in political science research to
provide explanations for observed patterns and behaviors.
- **Covering Laws**: The concept of covering laws in explanation refers to the idea that
explanations in science involve identifying general laws or principles that cover specific
instances or events. In political science, the covering law model suggests that explanations
are based on the application of general principles or theories to specific political
phenomena.
- **Reasons as Causes**: Reasons as causes theory emphasizes the role of reasons or
motivations in explaining human behavior and decision-making. In political science, this
approach highlights how individual and collective reasons can serve as causal factors in
shaping political actions and outcomes.
- **Historicism**: Historicism in explanation involves understanding political phenomena
in their historical context and considering the influence of historical processes and
developments on contemporary events. In political science, historicist approaches
emphasize the importance of historical analysis and contextual understanding in
explaining political dynamics.
- **Issues for Political Science**: The section raises critical issues for political science
research related to forms of explanation, including debates about the nature of causation,
the role of historical context in explanations, and the balance between general principles
and specific instances in explaining political phenomena. These issues prompt
researchers to consider the most appropriate explanatory frameworks for di erent types of
political events and behaviors.
In summary, the "Forms of Explanation" section provides a comprehensive exploration of
key approaches to explaining political phenomena in political science research. From
covering laws to reasons as causes and historicism, these explanatory frameworks o er
valuable insights into how researchers analyze and interpret political events and behaviors.
The section also highlights critical issues and challenges that shape the forms of
explanation used in political science research, prompting researchers to consider the most
e ective and contextually relevant approaches to explaining political phenomena.
6) Conclusion
As this chapter draws to a close, I hope it has delivered rather more than it first promised. It has
certainly tried to clear the underbrush of confusion that arises from reflecting on methods in terms
of traditions of political science rather than philosophical subfields and doctrines. Yet, in addition,
this chapter has tried to make a start at clearing the underbrush of confusion that arises from
political scientists relying on philosophical doctrines that the rise of meaning holism has left
looking increasingly implausible. It has argued that political science is too often committed to
forms of empiricism, realism, and formal explanation that increasingly lack philosophical
plausibility. It has suggested that we need to rethink political science and its methods so as to give
greater scope to theory choice, constructivism, and historicism. We might still defend empiricism,
but we must recognize that the justification of knowledge depends on comparing whole webs of
belief. We might still defend realism, but we must recognize that much of social reality is
linguistically constructed. We might still defend naturalism, but we must recognize that the human
sciences require historicist forms of explanation.15 Let me be clear, the problem is not that holism
repudiates any particular method for creating data; it does not. The problem is that holism
undermines the dominant meta-methodological commitments in terms of which political
scientists think about their data. Holism poses awkward questions about how political scientists
should use and explain the data generated by multiple methods. To be harsh, the real problem is
that political scientists have not even begun to think about these questions, let alone respond to
them and modify their practice accordingly. It is true that critical and constructivist approaches to
political science sometimes try to foreground such questions. Alas, however, other political
scientists are prone to dismiss these alternative approaches for lacking methodological rigor—as if
the nature and relevance of methodological rigor could be taken as given without bothering to think
about the relevant philosophical issues. To be harsher still, therefore, political scientists are in
danger of becoming dull technicians, capable of applying the techniques that they learn from
statisticians and economists, but lacking any appreciation of the philosophical issues entailed in
decisions about when we should use these techniques, the degree of rigor we should want from
them, and how we should explain the data they generate.
Many political scientists have long worried about hyperfactualism—the collection of data without
proper theoretical reflection. Today we might also worry about hypermethodologism—
the application of methodological techniques without proper philosophical reflection.