Assignment-3 - Behavioural Revolution in Political Science PDF

Preview

Summary

Behavioural Revolution in Political Science
...

Description

Behavioral revolution in political science Introduction: ●

Behavioralism has had revolutionary impact on Political Science. Its emphasis has been to understand man in society and bring about unity in social sciences. Scholars have learnt new modes of analysis and methods of data collection. There is a tendency of cross fertilisation or exchange of knowledge among scholars belonging to various disciplines.

●

In fact, it has given birth to many behavioural sciences, and has transformed the format of traditional disciplines. It has broadened the scope of Political Science itself.

●

It is an approach in political science that emerged in the 1930s in the United States. It represented a sharp break from previous approaches in emphasizing an objective, quantified approach to explain and predict political behaviour. It is associated with the rise of the behavioural sciences, modeled after the natural sciences.Behaviorism claims it can explain political behaviour from an unbiased, neutral point of view.

●

Behaviouralism seeks to examine the behaviour, actions, and acts of individuals – rather than the characteristics of institutions such as legislatures, executives, and judiciary and groups that relates it to the political system.

●

Prior to the "behavioralist revolution", political science being a science at all was disputed.Critics saw the study of politics as being primarily qualitative and normative, and claimed that it lacked a scientific method necessary to be deemed a science.Behavioralists used strict methodology and empirical research to validate their study as a social science.The behaviouralist approach was innovative because it changed the attitude of the purpose of inquiry. It moved toward research that was supported by verifiable facts . During its rise in popularity in the 1960s and '70s, behaviouralism challenged the realist and liberal approaches, which the behavioralists called "traditionalism", and other studies of political behaviour that was not based on fact.

Evolution: ●

In the 1940s the deep dissatisfaction with the narrow scope and unscientific methods of traditional political science (Historical, Philosophical and Legal-Institutional methods) turned into a revolution against it.

●

A large number of political scientists, particularly in the USA began advocating a rejection of traditional Political Science and the need for building a new empirical and behavioural science of Politics.

●

This revolution came to be identified as the Behavioral Revolution in Politics. It advocated the uses of empirical and scientific methods in the study of human political behaviour in each society. It fully recognized the importance and utility of interdisciplinary approach in the study of Politics.

●

Several behavioral scholars advocated the use of knowledge and concepts of Psychology, Sociology and Cultural Anthropology for the study of Politics. Arthur Bentley strongly advocated the study of group behaviour in Politics.

●

Within the broad ambit of Behavioral Revolution, there came to be developed several scientific-behavioural-empirical approaches and methods of study of Politics.

●

Like an umbrella, it covered all the approaches which rejected the traditional normative approach and advocated an empirical-scientific study of politics as an aspect of human behaviour in society.

●

It advocated an inter-disciplinary focus which focused on the study of politics with the help of knowledge of other social sciences like Psychology, Sociology, Economics, Anthropology and others.

David Easton and behavioralism: From 1942 through the 1970s, behaviouralism gained support. It was David Easton who started it in the study of political systems. It was the site of discussion between traditionalist and new emerging approaches to political science. Some of the most important points of behavioral revolution according to David Easton are as follows: 1. Regularities 2. Verification 3. Techniques 4. Quantification 5. Values 6. Systematisation 7. Pure Science 8. Integration. 1. Regularities: If observed properly, some uni-formities in human behaviour can be observed, discovered and found. These uniformities or regularities lead to generalisations or theories to explain human behaviour. Such as, repression causes rebellion everywhere. 2. Verification: These uniformities or generalisations should be valid, which means testable, at least in principle with reference to some relevant behaviour. It should be subject to checking and rechecking.

3. Techniques: There are some acceptable, public and standard means and methods for observing, recording and analysing behaviour. They are regarded as methodological techniques, such as sampling, interview, panel studies etc. which should remain available to all. These techniques are continuously reformed and refined to make data of observation more reliable and communicable among scholars. 4. Quantification: Uniformities obtained through observation should be precise, definite and measurable for this purpose; they should be quantified or expressed, either in numbers or symbols, as is done in natural sciences. 5. Values: The behavioural scholar does not start with any preconceived notions, or values because it vitiates his findings. Even if he believes in certain values, he either keeps them separate or announces them beforehand. He remains fully convinced that ultimate values or ends cannot be scientifically proved or disproved as their source of origin, form and ambit cannot be identified empirically. A communalist or a communist cannot, while remaining as such, become a dispassionate political scientist. 6. Systematisation:There should be close collaboration between theory and research, which are ‘closely interrelated parts of a coherent and orderly body of knowledge’. Research must be theory-oriented, and theory should be well-supported by data. Systematisation means close relationship between theory and data. 7. Pure Science:Behaviouralists put great emphasis on developing a ‘pure science’ of politics and in conducting basic research. That knowledge alone can be rightly put to the solution of urgent problems of society. Understanding and explanation of political behaviour logically precede its practical application. 8. Integration: It believes in interrelatedness of all social sciences and aims to make Political Science ‘interdisciplinary’. The ‘political man’ can be understood as a whole, by linking him with his other aspects: social, cultural, economic, religious, psychological and historical. Such an outlook is likely to make political studies again a ‘master science’ or an architechtonic discipline. In this sense, behaviouralism is not merely an ‘approach’, a mere ‘mood’ as Dahl says, or an ordinary reform movement, but ‘a total commitment to the broad and essential requirements of scientific knowledge’.  However, Easton’s enunciation of behaviouralism as above involves both its early and later phases. Early behaviouralism neglected values

completely, and was individual-oriented. Later, it moved towards macro study and incorporating values as ‘facts’ or ‘givens’.

Post behavioralism: ●

In 1950s Behaviouralism got transformed into Post-Behaviouralism. The postbehaviouralists now placed emphasis on making study of politics relevant to society involving the study of brute realities of politics and social change.

●

With the above objective in mind, most of the American political scientists came forward to undertake empirical research on various political issues with a touch of sociology in it. As the research expanded, the need for the study of politics in the social context came to be bigger and bigger.

●

This set the stage for the origin of Political Sociology as a major sub-field of Politics After sometime some theories of Political Sociology came to the fore and this helped this field of study to acquire more and more popularity and a status of its own....