7 - A Disciplinary History of Disciplinary Histories
The Case of Political Science
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 September 2014
Summary
Each generation redefines its own image of political science.
David Easton (1953, p. 148)The phrase “political science” has been in use since the eighteenth century (Farr 1988b). From its first uses in the Scottish and French Enlightenments into the late nineteenth century, it carried a wide and practical meaning. Political science in this older sense encompassed multiple areas of focused knowledge and skills – such as political economy, jurisprudence, and history – and involved applying one or more of these areas to inform practical judgments about what was possible and preferable in matters of present-day politics and policy. Political science in this sense was exemplified by Alexis de Tocqueville’s 1835/1840 Democracy in America (2000, p. 7), and later expounded by him in his 1852 address as president of France’s Académie des sciences morales et politiques (Tocqueville 2010). The wide practical science Tocqueville exemplified in France was just as prominent in Britain. When introducing their history of the ‘science of politics’ in nineteenth century Britain, Collini, Winch, and Burrow (1983, p. 3) observed wistfully, however, that the science they had surveyed “no longer appears on modern maps of knowledge, at least not as the extensive though vaguely delimited empire it once was.”
Between the late nineteenth and mid-twentieth centuries, the older wide and practical sense of political science gave way to a new, narrower, and professionalized sense that maps “political science” onto just one of the array of research-centered academic disciplines collectively labeled as the “social sciences.” Where the wide sense had been born in Europe and exported to America (where it was also standard into the 1880s, and in some settings longer), the narrower sense that supplanted it was developed in early twentieth century America, was later exported to Europe, and is today globally dominant. If we inquire into the history and historiography of “political science,” and, in doing so, use the phrase in its now dominant disciplinary sense, then we direct attention to studies largely focused upon developments in America’s academy or their overseas offspring. Most such studies are disciplinary, not simply in the figures and agendas they focus upon, but in their authorship and audience: They are written by members of the discipline, and for members of the discipline. These disciplinary histories of political science are the subject of my chapter.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- A Historiography of the Modern Social Sciences , pp. 211 - 236Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2014
References
. 2003. “The Emergence of Political Science as a Discipline: History and the Study of Politics in America, 1875–1910,” History of Political Thought 24.3:459–86.Google Scholar
2006. “The Emigration of the ‘Comparative Method’: Transatlantic Exchange and the Birth of American Political Science,” European Political Science 5:124–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2007. “Interpreting Behavioralism.” In Modern Political Science: Anglo-American Exchanges since 1870, ed. , , and . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
2014. Liberalism and the Emergence of American Political Science. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
and . 2007. “The Remaking of Political Theory.” In Modern Political Science: Anglo-American Exchanges since 1870, ed. , , and . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
and 2010. “Political Science.” In The History of Postwar Social Science, ed. and . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 71–101.Google Scholar
, and , eds. 2007. Modern Political Science: Anglo-American Exchanges since 1870. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
and . 2012. “Beyond Pluralism? Corporatism, Globalization, and the Dilemmas of Democratic Governance.” In Modern Pluralism: Anglo-American Debates since 1880, ed. . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
et al. 1962. “Political Science as a Discipline,” American Political Science Review 56.2:417–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1988. “Separate Tables: Schools and Sects in Political Science,” PS: Political Science and Politics 21.4:828–42.Google Scholar
1995. “Political Science: The History of the Discipline.” In A New Handbook of Political Science, ed. and . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2003. Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy: The Cold War Origins of Rational Choice Liberalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
and . 1999. “The Rochester School: The Origins of Positive Political Theory,” Annual Review of Political Science 2:269–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1988. Political Science: Between Past and Future. Finnish Political Science Association.
. 1904. “The Organization of the American Political Science Association,” Proceedings of the American Political Science Association 1:5–15.Google Scholar
. 1999. Creating International Studies: Angell, Mitrany, and the Liberal Tradition. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
2006. “Where Are the Idealists in Interwar International Relations?” Review of International Studies 32.2:291–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1989. Political Innovation and Conceptual Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2008. “The Intellectual Origins of New Political Science,” New Political Science 30.2:215–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ed. 2007. Victorian Visions of Global Order: Empire and International Relations in Nineteenth–Century Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2009. “Writing the World: Disciplinary History and Beyond,” International Affairs 85.1:3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 2003. “Do We Preach What We Practice? A Survey of Methods in Political Science Journals and Curricula,” PS: Political Science and Politics 36.3:373–8.Google Scholar
. 2007. “Institutionalism and the Third Way.” In Modern Political Science: Anglo-American Exchanges since 1870, ed. , , and . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
. 2006. “Great Punctuations: Prediction, Randomness, and the Evolution of Comparative Political Science,” American Political Science Review 100.4:487–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1983. That Noble Science of Politics: A Study in Nineteenth Century Intellectual History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1959. The American Science of Politics: Its Origins and Conditions. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
and . 1988. “History and Discipline in Political Science,” American Political Science Review 82.4:1245–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1998. Inventing International Society: A History of the English School. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1953. The Political System: An Inquiry into the State of Political Science. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
, , and , eds. 1991. The Development of Political Science: A Comparative Survey. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , eds. 1995. Regime and Discipline: Democracy and the Development of Political Science. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1988a. “The History of Political Science,” American Journal of Political Science 32.4:1175–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1988b. “Political Science and the Enlightenment of Enthusiasm,” American Political Science Review 82.1:51–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1990. “Francis Lieber and the Interpretation of American Political Science,” Journal of Politics 52.4:1027–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1995. “Remembering the Revolution: Behavioralism in Political Science.” In Political Science in History: Research Programs and Political Traditions, ed. , and . New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2007. “The Historical Sciences of Politics.” In Modern Political Science: Anglo-American Exchanges since 1870, ed. , , and . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
, , and , eds. 1995b. Political Science in History: Research Programs and Political Traditions. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
, , , , and . 1990. “Can Political Science History Be Neutral?” American Political Science Review 84.2:587–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 2006. “The Policy Scientist of Democracy: The Discipline of Harold Lasswell,” American Political Science Review 100.4:579–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1993. Discipline and History: Political Science in the United States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1995. “The Development of the Spatial Theory of Elections.” In Political Science in History: Research Programs and Political Traditions, ed. , and . New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2012. “On the Historical Forms of Knowledge Production and Curation: Modernity Entailed Disciplinarity, Postmodernity Entails Antidisciplinarity,” Osiris 27:56–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
et al. 2006. “Su Casa Es Nuestra Casa: Latino Politics Research and the Development of American Political Science,” American Political Science Review 100.4:515–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “The Forgotten Lindsay Rogers and the Development of American Political Science,” American Political Science Review 100.4:555–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2003. Mandarins of the Future: Modernization Theory in Cold War America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
1905. “The Work of the American Political Science Association,” Proceedings of the American Political Science Association 1 (1905):45–6.Google Scholar
. 2005. The Democracy Makers: Human Rights and International Order. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2008. “The Realist Gambit: Postwar American Political Science and the Birth of IR Theory,” International Political Sociology 2.4:281–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1995. “‘Public Opinion’ in Modern Political Science.” In Political Science in History: Research Programs and Political Traditions, ed. , , and . New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1978. “The Myth of the Tradition,” American Political Science Review 72.1:122–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1982. “Interpretation and the History of Political Theory: Apology and Epistemology,” American Political Science Review 76.2:317–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1988. “American Political Science, Liberalism, and the Invention of Political Theory,” American Political Science Review 82.1:71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1991. “The Historiography of American Political Science.” In The Development of Political Science: A Comparative Survey, ed. , , and . London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1992. “Continuity and Innovation in the History of Political Science: The Case of Charles Merriam,” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 28.2:133–42Google Scholar
1993. The Descent of Political Theory: The Genealogy of an American Vocation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1995. “The Declination of the ‘State’ and the Origins of American Pluralism.” In Political Science in History: Research Programs and Political Traditions, ed. James Farr, John Dryzek, and Stephen Leonard. New York: Cambridge University Press.
2004. Imagining the American Polity: Political Science and the Discourse of Democracy. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
2006. “The Founding of the American Political Science Association: Discipline, Profession, Political Theory, and Politics,” American Political Science Review 100.4:479–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2013. “The Reconstitution of Political Theory: David Easton, Behavioralism, and the Long Road to System,” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 49.2:190–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1939. Political Science in American Colleges and Universities, 1636–1900. New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
2005. “Defining ‘Theory’ in Postwar Political Science.” In The Politics of Method in the Human Sciences: Positivism and its Epistemological Others, ed. . Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
2006. “From Opposition to Accommodation: How Rockefeller Foundation Grants Redefined Relations between Political Theory and Social Science in the 1950s,” American Political Science Review 100.4:643–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2012. “The Ford Foundation and the Rise of Behavioralism in Political Science,” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 48.2:154–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1991. “Political Science in Britain,”European Journal of Political Research 20:301–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1974. Charles E. Merriam and the Study of Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 1977. Die Entwicklung der westdeutschen Politikwissenschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.Google Scholar
1991. “Political Science in West Germany.” In The Development of Political Science: A Comparative Survey, ed. , , and . London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2003. Desolation and Enlightenment: Political Knowledge after Total War, Totalitarianism, and the Holocaust. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2006. “Dividing the Domain of Political Science: On the Fetishism of Subfields,” Polity 38.1:41–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “The Political Theory Question in Political Science, 1956–1967,” American Political Science Review 100.4:531–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1958. “The State of the Discipline,” American Political Science Review 52.4:961–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “Transformations of the Concept of Ideology in the Twentieth Century,” American Political Science Review 100.4:619–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1968. “The Myth of Hyperfactualism in the Study of American Politics,” Political Science Quarterly 83.3:378–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “The Influence of European Émigré Scholars on Comparative Politics, 1925–1965,” American Political Science Review 100.4:597–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1999. “The Discipline as Disciplinary Normalization: Networks of Research,” New Political Science 21.3:345–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2003. Pluralism at Yale: The Culture of Political Science in America. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
1921. “The Present State of the Study of Politics,” American Political Science Review 15.2:173–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1923. “Recent Advances in Political Methods,” American Political Science Review 17.2:275–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1926. “Progress in Political Research,” American Political Science Review 20.1:1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1926. The History of Political Science: From Plato to the Present. Cambridge: Heffer and Sons.Google Scholar
. 2003. Our Enemies and US: America’s Rivalries and the Making of Political Science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
and . 2004. The Search for American Political Development. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1998. “Re-Reading Early Twentieth Century IR Theory: Idealism Revisited,” International Studies Quarterly 42.3:409–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1992. The Dependency Movement: Scholarship and Politics in Development Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 2002. “‘To Relate Knowledge and Action … ’: The Rockefeller Foundation’s Impact on Foreign Policy Thinking during America’s Rise to Globalism, 1939–1945,” Minerva 40.3:235–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1914. An Introduction to the History of the Science of Politics, new ed. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
. 2003. Foundations and Public Policy: The Mask of Pluralism. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
. 2004. “Half a Century of French Political Science: Interview with Jean Leca,”European Political Science 3:25–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1998. The Political Discourse of Anarchy: A Disciplinary History of International Relations. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
2002. “On the History and Historiography of International Relations.” In Handbook of International Relations, ed. , , and . London: Sage.Google Scholar
2008. “Political Science and the American Empire: A Disciplinary History of the “Politics” Section and the Discourse of Imperialism and Colonialism,” International Politics 45.6:675–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , eds. 2005. Imperialism and Internationalism in the Discipline of International Relations. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
. 2011. “To Order the Minds of Scholars: The Discourse of the Peace of Westphalia in International Relations Literature.” International Studies Quarterly 55.3:601–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1985. Disenchanted Realists: Political Science and the American Crisis 1884–1984. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
. 2006. “The Coevolution of the American Political Science and the American Political Science Review,” American Political Science Review 100.4:463–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , eds. 2006. Thematic Issue on the Evolution of Political Science, in Recognition of the Centennial of the Review. American Political Science Review 100.4.
. 1998. “’A Government of Men’: Gender, the City, and the New Science of Politics.” In Gender and American Social Science: The Formative Years, ed. . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
. 1969. “Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas,” History and Theory 8.1:3–53. Reprinted in Meaning & Context, ed. James Tully, 29–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2004. “The Puzzling Place of Race in American Political Science,” Political Science and Politics 37.1:41–5.Google Scholar
and . 1967. The Development of American Political Science: From Burgess to Behavioralism. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
, ed. 1962. Essays on the Scientific Study of Politics. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
. 2004. “Interwar Internationalism, the British Labor Party and the Historiography of International Relations,” International Studies Quarterly 48.2:409–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Democracy in America, trans. and . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2010. “Speech Given to the Annual Public Meeting of the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences on April 3, 1852.” In Alexis de Tocqueville and the Art of Democratic Statesmanship, ed. and , Jr. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, Chapter 1.Google Scholar
, and . 2006. “‘Far from Ideal’: The Gender Politics of Political Science,” American Political Science Review 100.4:507–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1991. “The Interaction of the State and Political Science in Canada: A Preliminary Mapping.” In The Development of Political Science: A Comparative Survey, ed. , , and . London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1965. “Disillusion and Regeneration: The Quest for a Discipline,” American Political Science Review 59.4:865–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ed. 1988. Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and His Critics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
. 2000. “The Graceful and Generous Liberal Gesture: Making Racism Invisible in American International Relations,” Millenium 29.2:331–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2008. “The Noble American Science of Imperial Relations and Its Laws of Race Development,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 52.4:909–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1975. “Political Science: Tradition, Discipline, Profession, Science, Enterprise.” In Political Science: Scope and Theory, ed. and . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
, , and . 1995. “Race and Political Science: The Dual Traditions of Race Relations and Politics and African-American Politics.” In Political Science in History: Research Programs and Political Traditions, ed. , and . New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1889. “Bryce’s American Commonwealth,” Political Science Quarterly 4.1:153–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2
- Cited by