Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:50:47.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Making Political Science Matter? Phronetic Social Science in Theory and Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 December 2013

Edward W. Gimbel
Edward W. Gimbel*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin—Whitewater
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Real Social Science: Applied Phronesis, edited by Bent Flyvbjerg, Todd Landman, and Sanford Schram, is an interesting read in the context of the current assault on both the scientific status and the practical utility of social science in general and political science specifically. In it, the editors collect examples of social scientific work that embrace what Flyvbjerg and others have described as phronetic social science. This approach makes creative use of the Aristotelian intellectual virtue of phronesis, or practical wisdom, which the editors identify with the knowledge of how to address and act on social problems in a particular context. Rather than emphasizing the universal truth (episteme) that has traditionally been the summum bonum of social scientific inquiry, or fixating on the know-how (techne) that is characteristic of methodologically driven approaches, Flyvbjerg, Landman, and Schram present examples of social scientific research where contextual knowledge, deep understanding of embedded power dynamics, and immediate relevance to political reality take center stage. In so doing they give the lie to those who would deny the practical relevance of social research. At the same time, however, the editors develop an understanding of phronesis that marginalizes valuable elements of Aristotle's understanding of the intellectual virtue, most notably its basis in self-examination, while simultaneously bringing phronesis much closer to techne by seeking to develop their phronetic social science along methodological lines.

Type
Review Essay
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 11 , Issue 4 , December 2013 , pp. 1139 - 1143
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Almond, Gabriel. 1990. A Discipline Divided: Schools and Sects in Political Science. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Aristotle. 1981. Poetics. Trans. Butcher, S.H.. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle. 1992. Eudemian Ethics: Books I, II, and VIII. Trans. Woods, Michael. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle. 1995. The Politics. Trans. Barker, Ernest. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle. 1998. The Nicomachean Ethics. Trans. Ross, W. D.. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1993. “The Behavioral Approach in Political Science: Epitaph for a Monument to a Successful Protest.” In Discipline and History: Political Science in the United States, ed. Farr, James and Seidelman, Raymond. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. Originally published in American Political Science Review 55(4): 763–72.Google Scholar
Farr, James. 1995. “Remembering the Revolution: Behavioralism in American Political Science.” In Political Science in History: Research Programs and Political Traditions, ed. Farr, James, Dryzek, John, and Leonard, Stephen T.. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, Bent. 2001. Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again. Trans. Sampson, Steven. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 1983. Reason in the Age of Science. Trans. Lawrence, Frederick G.. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 1989. Truth and Method. Trans. Weinsheimer, Joel and Marshall, D.G.. 2nd revised edition. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 1996. The Enigma of Health: The Art of Healing in a Scientific Age. Trans. Gaiger, Jason and Walker, Nicholas. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Green, Donald, and Shapiro, Ian. 1994. Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Green, Donald, and Shapiro, Ian. 1996. “Pathologies Revisited: Reflections on Our Critics.” In The Rational Choice Controversy: Economic Models of Politics Reconsidered, ed. Friedman, Jeffrey. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
McGovern, Patrick J., ed. 2010. “Perestroika in Political Science: Past, Present, and Future.” PS: Political Science and Politics 34(4): 725.Google Scholar
Monroe, Kristen Renwick. 2005. Perestroika! The Raucous Rebellion in Political Science. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Schram, Sanford, and Caterino, Brian. 2006. Making Political Science Matter: Debating Method, Knowledge, Research, and Method. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Ian, Smith, Rogers M., and Masoud, Tarek E., eds. 2005. Problems and Methods in the Study of Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
White, Stephen K. 2003. “Return to Politics: Perestroika and Postparadigmatic Political Science.” Political Theory: An International Journal of Political Philosophy 31(6): 836.Google Scholar