UTP » Chapter 2

Chapter 2: The Many Ways of Studying Politics

Chapter Summary Self-Study Questions Something to Consider Case Studies Key Terms Resources

CHAPTER SUMMARY

The political world offers a broad range of institutions, processes, and ideas for study; those studying politics have taken a similarly diverse set of approaches to that activity. A discipline that began as a branch of moral philosophy drew a distinction between the normative and the empirical as it sought to become a social science. The attempt to set aside the normative element of the political in its study has proven to be as useful as philosophizing in the absence of any evidence about political reality. Modern political science is challenged to engage in critical, rigorous research while remaining modest about its ability to produce law-like generalizations. A second set of distinctions has developed over the fundamental object of political study: Is it the individual, the group, socio-economic class, gender, or . . . ? To what degree does the fundamental object of inquiry reflect the interests or concerns of the inquirer? The persistence of many approaches to the discipline suggests it might be useful to appropriate all their insights—the work of specialists being balanced by the eclecticism of the generalist. Similarly, political science can benefit from related social scientific disciplines—anthropology, sociology, psychology. This is demonstrated when the work of political anthropology, particularly its investigation of pre-industrial societies, is considered and brought to bear on some of the fundamental concepts from Chapter 1, such as authority, power, coercion, and consent. Finally, the contrast and conflict are acknowledged between the “disinterested” approach necessary for the study of politics and our inevitably “interested” status as citizens and political actors.

SELF-STUDY QUESTIONS

Multiple Choice

(Answer key below)

1. If something is normative, it involves which of the following?

a. The government
b. Beliefs informing judgments
c. Observed information
d. All of the above

2. Using a range of different research methods is called which of the following?

a. Diversifism
b. Eclecticism
c. Flexible method
d. None of the above

3. Pluralists focus on which of the following?

a. The individual
b. The group
c. The class
d. The world

4. If research findings are applicable to the general population, they are said to be which of the following?

a. Internally valid
b. Externally valid
c. Both
d. Neither

5. Which of the following terms can be applied to the work done in political science?

a. Observational
b. Comparative
c. Analytics
d. All of the above

[qa cat=”ch2mcak”]

Short Answer

(Click to reveal answer)

[qa cat=”ch2ssq”]

SOMETHING TO CONSIDER

1. Whether it is normative or empirical, the study of politics attempts to replace opinion with knowledge. Is this a valid distinction, or is the difference simply one between informed or uninformed opinion? Does it matter much?

2. Research has shown that young Canadians (ages 18 to 25) have one of the lowest turnout rates to vote in national elections (see Milner). It also appears that participating in an election the first time a person is legally entitled to do so is critical to developing a long-term disposition to vote. Those who say “I’ll get around to voting when I’m older” are often very much older when they get around to it, if they ever do. In the meantime, others will make decisions for them. Would young Canadians be more likely to vote the first opportunity they could if they knew how important it could be to their own (and their country’s) future?

3. J. McIver Weatherford found analogies between the behaviours and rituals of the members of the US Congress and the First Nations tribes that had once inhabited the same regions. Is it possible to identify other cases in which earlier forms of social organization—such as bands, tribes, and chiefdoms—might be applied to groups or institutions within contemporary society?

CASE STUDIES

Social Scientific Experiment: The Milgram Experiment

As the text notes, experiments in the natural sciences are conducted in controlled situations, at least ideally, to reduce the influence of extraneous factors. In the social sciences, practical difficulties in maintaining a controlled environment in experiments involving humans present one challenge; the ethical implications of the possible effects of an experiment on its human subjects represent another. One of the most famous social scientific experiments was conducted by Stanley Milgram, in the 1960s, on the willingness of subjects to obey an authority figure and act contrary to their own conscience.

For a description of this experiment, see The Milgram Experiment, by Saul McLeod, published 2007.
Footage of the original experiment is available on YouTube. See Milgram Obedience Study.
Footage of a 2009 replication experiment is also available. See Milgram’s Obedience to Authority Experiment 2009.

Many believed that conducting this experiment was unethical and had the potential to inflict lasting harm on the experiment’s subjects. After viewing the videos, what do you think?

KEY TERMS

(Click term to reveal definition)
[qa cat=”ch2kt”]

RESOURCES

Chapter References

Barabas, Jason, and Jennifer Jerit. “Are Survey Experiments Externally Valid?” American Political Science Review 104.2 (2010): 226–242. Electronic Copy

Carneiro, R.L. “A Theory of the Origin of the State.” Science 69 (1970): 733–38. Electronic Copy
Alternatively, see a later article by Carneiro on this topic.

Easton, David. A Systems Analysis of Political Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965.

Haviland, William A. Anthropology, 6th ed. Orlando, FL: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1991.

Hirschman, Albert. “The Search for Paradigms as a Hindrance to Understanding.” World Politics 22.3 (1970): 329–343. Electronic copy of first page

Judson, Olivia. “The Selfless Gene.” The Atlantic Magazine (October 2007): 89–98. Electronic Copy

Kottak, Conrad Phillip. Cultural Anthropology. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991.

Lavine, Howard. “On-line versus Memory-Based Process Models of Political Evaluation.” Political Psychology. Ed. Kristen Monroe. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2002. 225–247.

Lewellen, Ted C. Political Anthropology: An Introduction. 2nd ed. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey, 1992.

Manzer, Ronald. Canada: A Socio-Political Report. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1974.

Mead, Lawrence. “Scholasticism in Political Science.” Perspectives on Politics 8.2 (June 2010): 453–464. Electronic Copy

Milner, Henry. “Are Young Canadians Becoming Political Dropouts?” IRPP Choices 11.3 (June 2005): 1–26. Electronic Copy

Paun, Akash, and Robert Hazell. “Hung Parliaments and the Challenges for Westminster and Whitehall.” The Political Quarterly 81.2 (April-June 2010): 213–227. Get Abstract

Service, Elman. Primitive Social Organization: An Evolutionary Perspective. New York: Random House, 1962.

Sil, Rudgra, and Peter J. Katzenstein. “Analytical Eclecticism in the Study of World Politics.” Perspectives on Politics 8.2 (June 2010): 411–431. Get Abstract

Weatherford, J. McIver. Tribes on the Hill. New York: Rawson, Wade, 1981.

Online Resources

Listen to 2009 Massey Lectures “The Wayfinders: Why Ancient Wisdom Matters in the Modern World” by Wade Davis

Watch (in 6 parts) “Tom Harrisson: The Barefoot Anthropologist,” BBC documentary from 2006 (Part 1)

Watch (in 6 parts) “Tales from the Jungle: Margaret Mead,” BBC documentary from 2006 (Part 1)