Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T09:48:30.290Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Clouds, Clocks, and the study of Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2011

Gabriel A. Almond  and
Stephen J. Genco
Gabriel A. Almond
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Stephen J. Genco
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Get access

Abstract

In its eagerness to become scientific, political science has in recent decades tended to lose contact with its ontological base. It has tended to treat political events and phenomena as natural events lending themselves to the same explanatory logic as is found in physics and the other hard sciences. This tendency may be understood in part as a phase in the scientific revolution, as a diffusion, in two steps, of ontological and methodological assumptions from the strikingly successful hard sciences: first to psychology and economics, and then from these bellwether human sciences to sociology, anthropology, political science, and even history. In adopting the agenda of hard science, the social sciences, and political science in particular, were encouraged by the neopositivist school of the philosophy of science which legitimated this assumption of ontological and meta-methodological homogeneity. More recently, some philosophers of science and some psychologists and economists have had second thoughts about the applicability to human subject matters of strategy used in hard science.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , July 1977 , pp. 489 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 1977

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

1 Popper, Karl R., ”Of Clouds and Clocks: An Approach to the Problem of Rationality and the Freedom of Man,” in Popper, Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach (Oxford:Clarendon Press 1972), 210Google Scholar; emphasis in original.

2 Ibid. 213; emphasis in original.

3 Ibid., 226; emphasis in original.

4 Compton, Arthur H., The Freedom oj Man (New Haven: Yale University Press 1935Google Scholar).

5 Popper (fn. 1), 228, 229; emphasis in original.

8 Ibid., 231–32; emphasis in original.

7 See Campbell, Donald T., ”Variation and Selective Retention in Socio-cultural Evolution,” General Systems Yearbook XIV (1969Google Scholar).

8 Popper (fn. i), 240–41; emphasis in original.

9 Ibid., 254–35.

10 Sprout, Harold and Sprout, Margaret, The Ecological Perspective on Human Affairs (Princeton: Princeton University Press 1965Google Scholar).

11 Campbell, Angus and others, The Voter Decides (Evanston, Ill.: Row Peterson 1954Google Scholar); Campbell and others, The American Voter (New York:Wiley 1960Google Scholar).

12 Nie, Norman, Verba, Sidney, and Petrocik, John R., The Changing American Voter (Cambridge:Harvard University Press 1976Google Scholar), 345ff; Burnham, Walter Dean, Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics (New York:Norton 1970Google Scholar).

13 Converse, Philip E., ”Public Opinion and Voting Behavior,” in Greenstein, Fred I. and Polsby, Nelson W., eds., Handbooks of Political Science, IV (Boston:Addison-Wesley 1975), 126Google Scholar.

14 For a recent review of the literature, see David O. Sears, ”Political Socialization,” in Greenstein and Polsby (fn. 13), 93ff.

15 Jennings, M. Kent and Niemi, Richard G., The Political Character of Adolescence (Princeton:Princeton University Press 1974Google Scholar).

18 See Dye, Thomas R., Understanding Public Policy (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice-Hall 1972), 243Google Scholar–48, for a review of this literature and a fuller formulation of these findings and inferences.

17 For a review of this literature, see Almond, Gabriel A., Flanagan, Scott C., and Mundt, Robert J., eds., Crisis, Choice and Change (Boston:Little Brown 1973Google Scholar), 8ff.

18 Bell, Daniel, The End of Ideology (New York:Free Press 1960Google Scholar).

19 Bell, Daniel, The Coming of Post-Industrial Society (New York:Free Press 1973Google Scholar).

20 Bell, Daniel, The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (New York:Basic Books 1976Google Scholar).

21 Easton, , The Political System (New York:Knopf 1953), 55Google Scholar.

22 Truman, David B., ”The Impact on Political Science of the Revolution in the Behavioral Sciences,” reprinted in Eulau, Heinz, ed., Behavioralism in Political Science (New York:Atherton 1969Google Scholar).

23 Scarrow, Howard A., Comparative Political Analysis: An Introduction (New York:Harper & Row 1969), 33Google Scholar.

24 Conway, Margaret and Feigert, Frank B., Political Analysis: An Introduction (Boston: Allyn and Bacon 1972), 17Google Scholar.

25 Przeworski, Adam and Teune, Henry, The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry (New York:Wiley 1970), 4Google Scholar.

26 Frohock, Fred M., The Nature of Political Inquiry (Homewood, Ill.:Dorsey 1967), 141Google Scholar.

27 Isaak, , The Scope and Method of Political Science (Homewood, Ill.:Dorsey 1969), 80Google Scholar.

28 Conway and Feigert (fn. 24), 27.

29 , Braithwaite, Scientific Explanation (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press 1953Google Scholar).

30 Hempel, , Aspects of Scientific Explanation (New York:Free Press 1965Google Scholar); see also Nagel, Ernest, The Structure of Science (New York:Harcourt, Brace and World 1961Google Scholar).

31 Kaplan, Abraham, The Conduct of Inquiry (San Francisco:Chandler 1964), 339Google Scholar.

32 Ibid.

33 Diesing, Paul, Patterns of Discovery in the Social Sciences (Chicago:Aldine Atherton 1971), 164Google Scholar.

34 See Hempel (fn. 30), 367, where this position is maintained while its obverse—that a valid prediction must also qualify as an explanation—is put aside. This modification of the so-called ”symmetry thesis of explanation and prediction” has not always been appreciated by political scientists. See, e.g., Young, Oran, ”The Perils of Odysseus: On Constructing Theories in International Relations,” in Tanter, Raymond and Ullman, Richard, eds., Theory and Policy in International Relations (Princeton:Princeton University Press 1972), 183Google Scholar.

35 Hempel (fn. 30), 351; see also Nagel (fn. 30), 323.

36 Braithwaite (fn. 29), 2; see also Hempel (fn. 30), 348–49.

37 Dahl, , ”Cause and Effect in the Study of Politics,” in Lerner, Daniel, ed., Cause and Effect (New York:Free Press 1965), 87Google Scholar.

38 Isaak (fn. 27), 95.

39 See, e.g., Sosa, Ernest, Causation and Conditionals (Oxford:Oxford University Press 1975Google Scholar); Brand, Myles, ed., The Nature of Causation (Urbana:University of Illinois Press 1976Google Scholar).

40 There are many disputes concerning the philosophical status of causality that go well beyond this consensual element of its meaning—for example, the problem of whether the causal connection represents a constant conjunction, logical necessity, or ”natural” necessity; and the problem of the temporal ordering and contiguity of causes and effects. For a discussion of these in terms relevant to political science research, see von Wright, Georg Henrik, Explanation and Understanding (Ithaca, N.Y.:Cornell University Press 1971Google Scholar).

41 Hempel (fn. 30), 348–49.

42 Kaplan, ”Noncausal Explanation,” in Lerner (fn. 37), 146.

43 Simon, , Models of Man (New York:Wiley 1957), 5Google Scholar.

44 McFarland, , Power and Leadership in Pluralist Systems (Stanford:Stanford University Press 1969), 29Google Scholar.

45 Nagel, , The Descriptive Analysis of Power (New Haven:Yale University Press 1975). 29Google Scholar.

46 Dahl, , Modern Political Analysis (3rd ed.; Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice-Hall 1976Google Scholar), 30; emphasis in original.

47 Hart, H. L. A. and Honore, A. M., Causation in the haw (Oxford:Clarendon Press 1959), 52Google Scholar.

48 For further arguments along similar lines, see Ball, Terence, ”Power, Causation and Explanation,” Polity, viii (Winter 1975), 189–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

49 See von Wright (fn. 40), chap. 1.

50 See, e.g., Nagel (fn. 30); Hempel (fn. 30), chap. 9; Brodbeck, May, ”Explanation, Prediction, and ‘Imperfect’ Knowledge,” in Feigl, Herbert and Maxwell, Grover, eds., Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science: Vol. 3 (Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press 1962Google Scholar); Rudner, Richard S., Philosophy of Social Science (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice-Hall 1966Google Scholar); Rudner, , ”Comment: On the Evolving Standard View in Philosophy of Science,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 66 (September 1972CrossRefGoogle Scholar).

51 Riker, William H., quoted in ”Editorial Comment,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 68 (June 1974), 733Google Scholar–34.

52 Tufte, Edward R., ”Improving Data Analysis in Political Science,” World Politics, xxi (July 1969Google Scholar).

53 Mack, Andrew, ”Numbers Are Not Enough,” Comparative Politics, vii (July 1975Google Scholar).

54 Strauch, Ralph E., ”A Critical Look at Quantitative Methodology,” Policy Science, 11 (Winter 1976Google Scholar).

55 See, e.g., Alker, Hayward R., ”The Long Road to International Relations Theory: Problems of Statistical Nonadditivity,” World Politics, xviii (July 1966Google Scholar); Blalock, Hubert M., ”Correlated Independent Variables: The Problem of Multicollinearity,” in Tufte, Edward R., ed., The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley 1970Google Scholar).

56 Tukey, , Exploratory Data Analysis (Reading, Mass.:Addison-Wesley 1977Google Scholar); Hoaglin, David C., A First Course in Data Analysis (Reading, Mass.:Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar, forthcoming).

57 Holt, Robert T. and Richardson, John M. Jr., ”Competing Paradigms in Comparative Politics,” in Holt, and Turner, John E., eds., The Methodology of Comparative Research (New York:Free Press 1970), 70Google Scholar.

58 Gregor, , ”Political Science and the Uses of Functional Analysis,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 62 (June 1968), 425CrossRefGoogle Scholar–39; Young (fn. 34).

59 Ibid., 196.

60 Holt and Richardson (fn. 57), 70–71.

61 Riker, William H. and Ordeshook, Peter C., An Introduction to Positive Political Theory (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice-Hall 1973Google Scholar), 11. A sympathetic yet sober evaluation of the utility of rational choice models for explaining and predicting coalition behavior is offered by De Swann, Abram, Coalition Theories and Cabinet Formations (San Francisco:Jossey-Bass 1973Google Scholar).

62 Riker and Ordeshook (fn. 61), 11–12. By ”explanation,” we can only assume that Riker and Ordeshook mean ”definition,” since the postulation of rationality defines a (hypothetical) type of behavior, but does not explain it in any way.

63 Moon, ”The Logic of Political Inquiry: A Synthesis of Opposed Perspectives,” in Greenstein and Polsby (fn. 13), I.

64 Ibid., 194.

65 Alker, ”Polimetrics: Its Descriptive Foundations,” in Greenstein and Polsby (fn. 13), VII, 157.

66 Kaplan (fn. 31), 3.

67 Roberts, Marc J., ”On the Nature and Condition of Social Science,” Daedalus, Vol. 103 (Summer 1974), 61Google Scholar, 62.

68 Chein, , ”The Image of Man,” Journal of Social Issues, xviii (October 1962), 3Google Scholar.

69 Ibid. Similar arguments are made in Harre, Rom and Secord, P. F., The Explanation of Social Behavior (Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Littlefield 1972Google Scholar).

70 Chein (fn. 68), 2; emphasis in original; 18.

71 Campbell, , ”On the Conflict Between Biological and Social Evolution and Between Psychology and Moral Tradition,” American Psychologist, xxx (December 1975), 1120Google Scholar.

72 Ross, , ”The Intuitive Psychologist and His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process,” in Berkowitz, L., ed., Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, X (New York:Academic Press 1977), 174Google Scholar.

73 Cronbach, , ”Beyond the Two Disciplines of Scientific Psychology,” American Psychologist, xxx (February 1975), 116CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 125.

74 Ibid., 122–23.

75 Ibid., 126.

76 Myrdal, Gunnar, Against the Stream: Critical Essays on Economics (New York:Vintage 1972), 143Google Scholar.

77 Galbraith, John K., ”Power and the Useful Economist,” American Economic Review, Vol. 63 (March 1973), 2Google Scholar.

78 Roberts (fn. 67), 60.

79 Morgenstern, , ”Thirteen Critical Points in Contemporary Economic Theory,” Journal of Economic Literature, x (December 1972), 1164Google Scholar–65.

80 Leontief, , ”Theoretical Assumptions and Nonobserved Facts,” American Economic Review, Vol. 61 (March 1971)Google Scholar, 1, 2, 3; emphasis in original.

81 Morgenstern (fn. 79), 1187–88.

82 Galbraith (fn. 77), 4.

83 Quoted in Greene, Wade, ”Economists in Recession,” New York Times Magazine May 12, 1974Google Scholar, p. 64.

86 Leontief (fn. 80), 3.

85 Hirschman, Albert O., A Bias for Hope (New Haven:Yale University Press 1971), 27Google Scholar.

88 Popper (fn. 1); Conjectures and Refutations (New York:Basic Books 1963Google Scholar); The Logic of Scientific Discovery (New York:Basic Books 1959Google Scholar).

87 Polanyi, Michael, Personal Knowledge (Chicago:University of Chicago Press 1958Google Scholar).

88 Hanson, Norwood R., Patterns of Discovery (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press 1958Google Scholar); Observation and Explanation: A Guide to Philosophy of Science (New York:Harper and Row 1971Google Scholar).

89 Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago:University of Chicago Press 1962Google Scholar).

90 Quine, W. V. O., Ontological Relativity (New York: Columbia University Press 1969Google Scholar).

91 Lakatos, Imre, ”Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Pro-grammes,” in Lakatos, and Musgrave, Alan, eds., Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press 1970CrossRefGoogle Scholar).

92 Toulmin, Stephen, Human Understanding, I (Princeton: Princeton University Press 1972Google Scholar); Foresight and Understanding (New York:Harper and Row 1961Google Scholar).

93 See Campbell (fn. 71).

94 Bennett, , ”Anticipation, Adaptation, and the Concept of Culture in Anthropology,” Science, Vol. 192 (May 28, 1976), 847CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

95 Ibid., 850, 851.

96 MacRae, , The Social Function of Social Science (New Haven:Yale University Press 1976), 3Google Scholar.

97 Ibid., 277ff.

98 Lerner, Daniel and Lasswell, Harold D., eds., The Policy Sciences: Recent Developments in Scope and Method (Stanford:Stanford University Press 1951), 3Google Scholar, 12.