Christian Smith

2/28/2019
English 2010
Author’s Note: This discipline is where I am currently trying to attain my Associate’s, as

such it makes perfect sense to choose this as my subject for this paper on the writing conventions

of Political Science, as I may be writing in it at some point. This current draft was heavily

affected and informed by previous work, during which I would list writing conventions, write

down examples in each work, and answer questions relating to what this said about the field.

From there I simply wrote using that as a blueprint. After corrections as well, I’ve done a bit

more to explain the varying nature of the works I have chosen, as well as a more clear thesis

statement. I believe my essay does a good deal to explain the writing conventions and more

importantly, why they are the writing conventions of the discipline. Current challenges I believe

would be in me being unsure if I’m underexploring the conventions here, and that I feel I’ve not

done enough to make this subject interesting or engaging for the reader. While I broadly

understood Political Science, this paper and the process of writing it helps me to understand the

‘nuts and bolts’ of the underlying essay work a lot better, and in particular why they are set out a

certain way. More generally, it helps me to explore how and why someone uses the words in

writing, which should be helpful in analyzing any written work, not just Political Science.

The Most Important Disciplinary Writing Conventions of Political Science

Political Science is most simply a social science that deals systems of government, and

serves as a means to analyze political activity, behavior, and thought. The conventions of

Political Science are numerous, and each one is built for a specific reason. In particular, they all

illustrate the incredible complex and swiftly evolving nature of political science, as well as the

incredibly interdisciplinary nature of it. Among others, there are five distinctly important

conventions that much of Political Science. These conventions are exemplified three books.

Class, States, and International Relations by Budd Adrian, the Head of Division of Social
 Christian Smith
2/28/2019
English 2010
Sciences of London South Bank University with research interests in international relations. This

text seeks to critique and offer an alternative to Neo-Gramscian international relations theory

from a Marxist perspective, setting forward two positions, the Neo-Gramscian idea and the

author’s own alternative. It’s very directly an argument paper. International Relations and Islam:

Diverse Perspectives by Aidong, Nassef Manabilang, founder of PHISO (Philippine

International Studies Organization) and Co-IRIS (International Relations and Islamic Studies

Research Cohort). This book presents the idea of finding an understanding between the western

social science of International Relations, and the Islamic Studies and culture in the Islamic

world, in particular focusing on Turkey. While it makes a few arguments, this is not the focus,

rather it is about analyzing the Islamic world. And thirdly, Cyberpolitics in International

Relations by Nazli Choucri, Professor of Political Science, working in the area of international

relations and most notably on sources of consequences of international conflict and violence.

This book is an examination and analysis of how cyberspace is changing both the theory and

practice of international relations. These three works each, despite being rather different subjects,

one arguing against a position, another drawing comparisons and clarifications, and another

discussing recent developments, display these five conventions of directly responding to other

scholarship, direct quotation and citation’s commonness, defining central terms, section headers,

and foundation building.

The first disciplinary convention of Political Science is the tendency of scholarship to

directly respond to other scholarship in the same field. This varies in great amounts, Class,

States, and International Relations directly responding to other scholarship, even directly stating

“This book provides an outline and a critique of Neo-Gramscian international relations theory,

from a Marxist perspective” (Budd, 2013) in the abstract. International Relations and Islam:
 Christian Smith
2/28/2019
English 2010
Diverse Perspectives on the other hand does not so directly target something. However it

criticizes the current state of international relations, saying “The aims of this initial initiative are

to show juxtaposed positions of mutual perceptions or diverse perspectives between Islam and IR

based on conceived notions of contested conceptions, to eliminate deplorable and pejorative

(mis)conceptions of IR scholars towards Islam and vice versa,” (Adiong, 2013). Cyberpolitics in

International Relations is the least related to this convention, but even it takes time to briefly

address and respond to current scholarship in its statement about its purpose. “International

relations theory has yet to recognize the implications of cyberspace for the conduct of

international relations, notably in relation to the pursuit of ‘power and wealth’ (Gilpin 1987)”

(Choucri, 2012). This is indicative of the interconnectedness of this discipline, much of

scholarship is built on correcting other scholarship, and often times one is incapable of seeing

their own biases. This convention is here to reexamine idea, and encourages self-evaluation and

critical evaluation in the discipline. Political is and in many ways must keep evolving past itself,

in such a way that other scientific fields do not need to, for while they may deal with relatively

stable foundations (gravity is unlikely to be uprooted any time soon), political science must

constantly correct itself and adapt with the people, for they are also always changing.

The second convention is direct quotation and citation. This one is rather uniform from

the books, as they each directly cite something, be it an in-text citation or a footnote. Class,

States, and International Relations for example has “Cox does not give any substantial content to

his socialism in this essay, but he writes positively of the wing of Quebec nationalism that

proposed a ‘social democratic view of an alternative to the Anglo-dominated capitalism of the

1940s’ (Cox 1996a: 20–21)” (Budd, 2013). International Relations and Islam: Diverse

Perspectives states as follows: As historian Reinhard Schulze explain, “it demands that the
 Christian Smith
2/28/2019
English 2010
Islamic World be on principle excluded from the history of modernities because it is bound to a

religion which it has not traversed the ‘politico-ideological progress that made Europe into a

‘historical idea.’” 1 (Adiong, 2013) Nazli Choucri wrote in Cyberpolitics in International

Relations that Over time, the term cyberspace has taken on many different meanings derived

from its fundamental features, those pertaining to networked, computer-sustained, computer-

accessed, and computer- generated multidimensional artificial, or “ virtual, ”reality (Benedikt

1994b, 122) (Choucri, 2012). Once again, the importance of scholarship is evident here, as a

source of knowledge, it is important to cite directly. This applies doubly to Political Science

where words can have many meanings, and thus the exact phrasing can only help clarify your

paper and quotation. It can allow a reader to more accurately analyze your work, perhaps finding

a flaw in how you utilized your quotation. Texts are researched, considered, utilized, and if they

get an idea from it, the researcher makes certain to cite the exact statement he is referring to. So

much of Political Science is built upon theory, either affirming or denying it is a great deal of

scholarship in Political Science. It is impossible to experiment in Political Science, and as such,

citation and showing sources is extremely important. After all, a few simple word changes can

utterly change the meaning of a statement, which may be incredibly important when dealing with

the politics of our world.

The third convention is defining the central terms of the work. As examples, Cyberspace

in International Relations provides a table listing and defining the characteristics of its main

subject, Cyberspace. International Relations and Islam: Diverse Perspectives provides a list of

key words at the beginning of chapters one through six, listing objects, events, and concepts that

are important. Class, states, and International Relations goes above and beyond, and spends

1
Reinhard Schulze, A Modern History of the Islamic World. p.2.
 Christian Smith
2/28/2019
English 2010
about half the book (part I) specifically outlining the Neo-Gramscian position the work is

responding to. This makes perfect sense, given how terms in Political Science can vary in

meaning depending on setting, it can be very important to define exactly what is meant by one

term or another. Given how wide reaching international relations and Political Science can reach

as well, one should be hesitant to simply assume the audience, even an informed audience, will

know exactly what they mean when they refer to a term. In a world where the language of

politics is living and ever changing, it is important to define your central terms, for posterity and

even simply the background of the reader.

The forth convention is section headers that give a brief title to the section within a

chapter. For example, Cyberspace in International Relations has a section header titled “1.1

Cyberspace and Politics” (Choucri, 2012) on page 5, and a section called “1.2 Anchors for

International Relations Theory” (Choucri, 2012) and so on and so forth. International Relations

and Islam: Diverse Perspectives has something similar, with a section header reading “Scholarly

Rhetoric” and then another section header called “Section 1: Iran in Historical Context.” Class,

States, and International Relations as another example utilizes in its introduction three section

headers, called “Marxism in International Relations,” “The Structure of this book,” and “Some

Words of warning.” Each of these section headers prompts the reader to a particular change in

subject. It highlights the specific new subject being covered here, and this reflects the

interdisciplinary nature of Political Science. It’s easy, even when covering a specific subject, to

draw connections to all sorts of fields, contexts, and subjects that a reader or even writer may not

be as familiar with. This makes it easier to organize a text, find one’s way around it, and clarify

intent and focus.

 Christian Smith
2/28/2019
English 2010
The fifth convention, in many ways shown by the others conventions as well, is the

importance of foundation building in a work of Political Science. Class, States, and International

Relations for example spends its introduction and part 1 clarifying itself and its purpose, before

talking at length about the position it will then refute in part 2. International Relations and

Islam: Diverse Perspectives also takes time to talk about the origins and ideas behind the book,

the inadequacy of international relations scholarship at the time of writing, both these books do

so in their introduction chapter as well. Cyberpolitics in International Relations as well sets the

first chapter of its first part, “New Challenges to International Relations Theory and Policy” to

lay out the brief history of international relations, how it is changing, how scholarship has not

kept up, and finally defining various terms, all necessary to ensure understanding of the rest of

the book. It is clear that this shows the importance placed on showing the foundation of the

work, the reason for being, where it gets its information, why it is being written at all. This is

important due to one important fact already mentioned, one cannot create replicable and

repeatable experiments, as Political Science’s subject is our world, of which we only have one,

and scientists are not the only ones learning, the normal people pay attention to these events as

well.

The many conventions of Political Science ultimately come back to two main attributes

of the work: The interdisciplinary nature of the field, and the ever-changing nature of subject of

study. Political Science does not simply stop at the ‘politics’ of a situation, as those politics are

informed by many other real world phenomena, history, religion, ideology, even more physical

fields of science such as geography and climate. To study even a small group or event, one must

dip into multiple subjects, as many different factors build up to any specific situation happening

in the world. Making it even more complicated, was that unlike other sciences, we cannot simply
 Christian Smith
2/28/2019
English 2010
form experiments, and repeat them, we only have one experiment, and that is the experience of

humanity. It cannot be replicated, because people also see these events and learn from them,

ideas will spread far beyond where they first began, and inform the thoughts of others. It is

because of this, that the conventions listed above are so common in writings of Political Science.
 Christian Smith
2/28/2019
English 2010
Bibliography
Adiong, N. M. (2013). International Relations and Islam: Diverse Perspectives. Newcastle: Cambridge
Scholars Publishing.

Budd, A. (2013). Class, States, and International Relations. Routledge.

Choucri, N. (2012). Cyberpolitics in International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge.