Separate Tables: Schools and Sects in Political Science Author(s): Gabriel A.

Almond Source: PS: Political Science and Politics, Vol. 21, No. 4 (Autumn, 1988), pp. 828-842 Published by: American Political Science Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/420022 Accessed: 06/10/2008 05:17
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=apsa. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to PS: Political Science and Politics.

http://www.jstor.org

Separate

Tables

Schools and Sects in Political Science*

GabrielA. Almond StanfordUniversity

"'Miss Cooper:Loneliness a terrible is thing

Miss Cooper:Isanytype an 'alone'type, Miss Meacham. ?" . TerenceRattigan's Tables, (From Separate (1955,78, 92)

GABRIEL ALMOND A.

InSeparate Tables,the hit of the 1955 New Yorktheatricalseason, the Irish playwright, hotel in Terence Rattigan, used the metaphorof solitarydinersin a second-rateresidential Cornwallto convey the lonelinessof the humancondition.It may be a bit far fetched to use this metaphorto describe the conditionof politicalscience in the 1980s. But in some sense the variousschoolsand sects of political science now sit at separatetables, each with its own conception of proper politicalscience, but each protectingsome secret islandof vulnerability. Itwas not alwaysso. Ifwe recallthe state of the professiona quarterof a centuryago, let us say inthe early 1960s,DavidEaston's(1953) and DavidTruman's (1955)scoldingsof had the professionfor its backwardness amongthe socialscience disciplines, been takento and productivecadre of young politicalscientists. In 1961 Robert heart by a substantial the Dahlwrote hisEpitaph a Monument a Successful to Protest for reflecting sure confidence of a successful movement, whose leaderswere rapidly becomingthe most visiblefiguresin Persuasion the profession. Neither Dahl nor Heinz Eulau,whose Behavioral appeared in science. They expressed 1963made exaggeratedor exclusiveclaimsfor the new political the view that the scientific phenomenahad proven itself, approachto the study of political and that it could take its place alongsidepoliticalphilosophy,publiclaw, and institutional historyand description,as an importantapproachto the study of politics.As the part of the discipline"on the move," so to speak, it created some worry among the older subAn disciplines. appropriatemetaphor for the state of politicalscience at that time, perwould be the "youngTurk-old Turk"model, with the youngTurksalreadybeginhaps ningto gray at the temples. But we were all Turks. Now there is this uneasyseparateness.The publicchoice people seek an anchoragein to reality, a "new institutionalism," house their powerful deductive apparatus;the politicaleconometricianswant to relate to historicaland institutionalprocesses; the values by "scientism,"and sufferfrom feelhumanists cringeat the avoidanceof political 828 PS: Political Science and Politics

Separate Tables Figure I.

IdeologicalDimension

Hard Methodological
Dimension

Left HL SL

Right HR SR

Soft

ingsof inadequacyin a world dominated by statisticsand technology;and the radicaland "critical"politicaltheorists, like the ancient prophets, lay about them with anathemas againstthe behavioristsand positivists,and the very notion of a politicalscience professionalism that would separate knowledgefrom action. Buttheir anti-professionalism must leave them in doubt as to whether they are scholarsor politicians. The uneasinessin the political science professionis not of the body but of the soul. Inthe last several decades the profession has more than doubled in numbers. Americantype to politicalscience has spread to Europe, LatinAmerica, Japan,and more interestingly and Chinaand the USSR.Political science has taken on the organizational methodological attributes of science-research institutes, large-scalebudgets, the use of statisticaland mathematical science has prospered materially, it is not but methods, and the like. Political a happy profession. an We are separated alongtwo dimensions; ideologicalone, and a methodologicalone dimensionthere are the extremes of soft and hard. (see FigureI). On the methodological At the soft extreme are CliffordGeertz (1973) types of "thicklydescriptive," clinical Albert Hirschman studies. As an example of this kindof scholarship (1970) celebratedthe Zapata, with its JohnWomack (1969) biographyof the Mexicanguerrillahero, Emiliano efforts to prove propositions almost complete lack of conceptualization, hypothesizing, and the like. Despite this lack of self-conscioussocial science, Hirschmanargues, the of Zapata study was fullof theoretical implications the greatest importance.Leo Strauss with their exegeticalapproachto the evocaphilosophy (1959) and hisfollowers in political tion of the ideas of politicalphilosopherscome pretty close to this soft extreme as well, but while Womack's kind of work leaves everythingbut narrativeand descriptionto of Straussian implication, exegesis involvesthe discipline the explicationof the great texts, their "true" meaningthroughthe analysisof their language. ascertaining Somewhat away from the soft extreme, but still on the soft side of the continuum, would be political philosophicalstudies more open to empiricalevidence and logical analysis.Recent work such as that of MichaelWalzer on justice (1983) and obligation (1970), Carole Patemanon participation (1970) and obligation (1979) would be illustrative. Here there is more than a simple, rich evocation of an event or personality,or precise A exegesis of the ideasof political philosophers. logicalargumentis advanced,often tested throughthe examinationof evidence, and developed more or less rigorously. At the other extreme of the methodologicalcontinuumare the quantitative,econometric, and mathematicalmodellingstudies; and the most extreme would be the combinationof mathematical modelling,statistical analysis,experiment, and computer simulain tion in the publicchoice literature.Theoriesof voting, coalitionmaking,decision-making the committees, and in bureaucracies,involving testing of hypotheses generated by formal, mathematicalmodels would exemplifythis hard extreme. On the ideologicalcontinuumon the left we have four groups in the Marxisttraditionthe Marxistsproperlyspeaking,the "criticalpoliticaltheorists," the dependencistas, and the world system theorists, allof whom deny the possibility separating of knowledgefrom action, and who subordinatepoliticalscience to the strugglefor socialism.At the conservativeend of the continuum the neo-conservatives are who favor amongother thingsa Fall 1988 829

Separate Tables free market economy, and limitson the power of the state, as well as an aggressiveanticommunistforeign policy. If we combine these two dimensionswe end up with four schools of politicalscience, tables. four separate tables-the soft-left, the hard-left,the soft-right,and the hard-right Reality,of course, is not quite this neat. The ideologicaland methodologicalshadingsare more complex, more subtle. To elaborate our metaphor a bit but stillwithinthe refectoral realm, since the overwhelmingmajorityof politicalscientistsare somewhere in the center-"liberal" and moderate in ideology, and eclectic and open to conviction in methodology-we mightspeak of the great cafeteriaof the center, from whichmost of us select our intellectualfood, and where we are seated at large tables with mixed and table companions. changing

The outlying tables inthis disciplinary refectoryare stronglylitand visible,whilethe large center lies in shade. It is unfortunatethat the mood and reputationof the politicalscience disciplineis so heavily infuenced by these extreme views. This is in part because the extremes make themselves highlyaudibleand visible-the soft left providinga pervasive virtuoso mathematical statisand noise, and the hardrightproviding flagellant background tical displaysappearingin the pages of our learnedjournals. The Soft Left Suppose we begin with the soft left. All of the sub-groupsof the soft left share in the world cannot be understood in terms meta-methodological assumptionthat the empirical of separate spheres and dimensions,but has to be understood as a time-space totality. "Criticaltheory," as developed by Horkheimer,Adorno, Marcuse,and others of the "FrankfurtSchool" reject the alleged detachment and disaggregatingstrategy of mainstreamsocial science. The various parts of the social process must be seen " . . as change"(Lukacs aspects of a total situationcaughtup inthe process of historical quoted in David Held [1980], 164).The student as well as that which he studies is involvedin strugfail "Positivists to comprehendthat the process of gle. Hence objectivityis inappropriate. strugglebetween humansand the world. knowingcannot be severed from the historical Theory and theoretical labor are intertwinedin social life processes. The theorist cannot remaindetached, passivelycontemplating,reflecting describing'society' or 'nature'" and (Held, 165). To understandand explain one must have a commitment to an outcome. scienceinthe positivistsense, that is, a political There is no political science separablefrom ideologicalcommitment.To seek to separate it is a commitmentto support the existing, obsolescent order. historically The more orthodox Marxistssuch as PerryAnderson (1976), Goran Therborn(1977), PhilipSlater (1977), and others, while sharingthe meta-methodology of the "Critical in school," go furtherand argue that unless one accepts historicalmaterialism the fullest the reductionistsense of explaining politicalrealmin classstruggleterms, one ends up failbetween theory and "praxis." ing to appreciate the relationship As we consider the composition of the soft left our four-fold metaphor of separate tables begins to break down. The Marxisttheorists of several persuasions-the "critical theorists," the "dependency"writers,and "worldsystem" theorists-make quarrelsome table companions. What they all share is a common belief in the unity of theory and of praxis, in the impossibility separatingscience and politics. As a logicalconsequence positivistpoliticalscience, which believes in the necessity of separatingscientificactivity from politicalactivity,loses contact with the overridingunityof the historical process and 830 PS: Political Science and Politics

Separate Tables is mindlesslylinkedto the status quo. Positivistpoliticalscience failsto take into account the historicaldialecticwhich makes the shift from capitalismto socialisminevitable. Fernando Cardoso, the leading theorist of the dependency school, contrasts the methodology of dependency theory with the North Americansocial science traditionin the followinglanguage: We attempt reestablish intellectual to tradition basedon a comprehensive science. social We the seek a global dynamic and of of instead looking at specific understanding socialstructures only We dimensions the social which of of tradition conceived dominaprocess. opposethe academic relations "dimensions" as tion and social-cultural of analytically independent one anotherand of to togetherindependent the economy,as if each one of these dimensions corresponded features reality. . We usea dialectical of .. to and separate approach studysociety,itsstructures of as is processes change.... Inthe end whathasto be discussed an alternative not the conof solidation the state and the fulfillment "autonomous of but capitalism," how to supercede them.The important and then,is howto construct question, pathstowardsocialism. (Cardoso Faletto,1979,ix andxxiv) Politicalscience can only be science then, if it is fully committed to the attainment of socialism. One of the leadingAmericanexpositors of the "'dependency" approach,Richard Fagen, of draws the implications Cardoso's views for the academic communityconcerned with has development issues. Realprogressin development scholarship to be associatedwith a of power relationsand ". . a much more difficult restructuring asymmetricinternational and historically assaulton capitalist forms of development themselves .... Only significant when this crucialunderstanding infusesthe nascentacademiccritiqueof the globalcapitalist system willwe be able to say that the paradigm shiftin mainstream U.S. socialscience is gatheringsteam and movingscholarshipcloser to what reallymatters" (1978, 80). Two recent interpretationsof the history of Americanpoliticalscience show that this "soft-left" critiqueof mainstreamwork in the disciplinehas taken on some momentum. David Ricciin TheTragedy Political Science of (1984) traces the emergence of a liberalscientific school of politicalscience in post-World War IIAmerica, a movement dedicated, values and assumpaccordingto Ricci,to provingthe superiorvirtue of liberalpluralistic tions by the most precise methods. The validityof this complacent "empiricalpolitical scientistsas DavidTruman,Robert Dahl, C. E. Lindtheory" constructedby such political blom, the Universityof Michigan group of voting specialists,and others, was undermined in the disorders of the late 1960s and early 1970s, and in the associated discrediting of American politics and public policy. Riccidraws the implicationof this behavioral-postbehavioral that political scienceas empirical science without the episode, as demonstrating systematic inclusionof moral and ethical values and alternatives,and a commitment to Political science has to choose sides; failing do to politicalaction, is doomed to disillusion. so results in its withdrawalinto specializedpreciosity,and futility.

...

~4 Ive44d.4sr~

.*Aj~4

'e tdc

ici4~4

4~t

.. .f^^^^ O
Ricci'ssoft leftismis of the humanistmoderate left variety.That of RaymondSeidelman treatment of the historyof Americanpolitical science. Ina (1985) is a more sharplyradical book entitled Disenchanted Realists:Political Scienceand the American Crisis,1884-1984, Seidelmandevelops the thesis in detail that there have been three trends in American trend, a democratic populist trend, and a relatively politicaltheory-an institutionalist Fall 1988 831

Separate Tables short-lived"liberalpolitical science" trend, initiatedin the 1920sand 1930sby the Univeryears sity of Chicagoschool, and floweringin the United States in the post-WorldWar 11 trend is the Hamiltonian-Madisonian tradition roughlyuntilthe 1970s.The institutionalist embodied in the constitutional system, so constructedthat it would frustratethe will of majorities.Separationof powers theory is based on a distrustof popular propensities. Contrasted with this tradition of American politicaltheory, is the democratic populist trend manifestedin earlyagrarian abolitionism, egalitarianism, populism,and the like.This second Thomas Painetraditionis anti-statist,anti-government was discreditedby the and rise of industrial-urban society and the necessity for strong centralgovernment. of The thirdtraditionwas based on a belief in the possibility a science of politicswhich would help produce a powerfulnationalstate, manned by trained experts pursuing constructiveand coherent publicpolicies,and supported by virtuouspopularmajorities.This third traditiondream of a great constructivepoliticalscience has been dispelledon both the politicaland the science sides. Politicalrealityhas turned into a disarticulated of set

%,

Ofo44444$4s4

hm4

4w

consistent elite-dominated"issue networks" and "iron triangles,"incapableof pursuing and effective publicpolicies;and the science has turned into a set of disembodiedspecialties lackingin linkageto politicsand publicpolicy. Seidelmanconcludes: science has fundamental and conflicts choices political Historically, professionalism onlyobscured as of of inAmerican life, public for it hastreatedcitizens objects studyor clients a benign political .... cannotbe realized scientists realize theirdemocratic that politics paternalism Untilpolitical if intellectual willremain life fromthe genuine heretoa cleaved professionalism, through barren dreamsof American citizens.Political sciencehistoryhas confirmed this fore subterranean even it. sciencemustbridge ifdelusions it, political separation, as it hastriedto bridge Modern into realities. are to be transformed new democratic (241) It The burdenof the soft left, thus, is an attack on politicalscience professionalism. is a callto the academyto jointhe political fray,to orient its teachingand researcharoundleft moderate or revolutionary socialism. ideologicalcommitments-in particular, The Hard Right at The hard right, on the other hand, is ultra-professional the methodologicallevel, deploying a formidable array of scientific methodologies-deductive, statistical, and experimental.There is a tendency to view softer historical,descriptive, and unsophisticated quantitativeanalysisas pre-professional,as inferiorbreeds of politicalscience, and althoughin recent years there has been a notable rediscoveryof politicalinstitutions, traditionpioneered by Gosnell, an effort to relate formaldeductivework to the empirical Herring,V. 0. Key. WilliamMitchell (1988), in a recent review of the publicchoice movement in political between the two principal and centers, which he calls the Virginia science, distinguishes RochesterSchools.The Virginia school, influential mainlyamong economists, was founded and by JamesBuchanan Gordon Tullock.The founderof the Rochesterschool, more influential among politicalscientists,was WilliamRiker.Both schools tend to be skepticalof school views the politicsand bureaucracyand are fiscallyconservative. But the Virginia of as to marketunambiguously the benchmark efficientallocation.The Virginians according Mitchelldisplaya ". . . firm conviction that the private economy is far more robust,
832

PS: Political Science and Politics

Separate Tables efficient, and perhaps equitable than other economies, and much more successfulthan resources .... Muchof what has been produced allocating politicalprocesses in efficiently Center for Study of PublicChoice, can best be described as contribuby the [Virginian] tions to a theory of the failureof politicalprocesses .. inequity,inefficiency, coercion and are the most general resultsof democratic policyformation"(pp. 106-7).Buchanan proposed an automatic deficit reduction plan years before the adoption of the GrammRudman-Hollings proposal; and he was the author of an early version of the proposed constitutional budget-balancing amendment. Buchanan,in two books-Democracy in Deficit, The Political of Legacyof LordKeynes(1977), and TheEconomics Politics (1978)presents a view of democratic politics in which voters act in terms of their short-run interests,that is to say oppose taxes and favor materialbenefitsfor themselves;politicians naturallyplay into these propensities by favoring spending and opposing taxing; and bureaucratsseek to extend their power and resources without regard to the public interest. These theorists differin the extent to whichthey believe that the short-runutilitymaximizer model captures humanreality.Some scholarsemploy the model only as a way of generatinghypotheses.ThusRobertAxelrod, usingdeductivemodelling, experimentation and computer simulation, made importantcontributions our understanding how has to of cooperative norms emerge, and in particularhow norms of internationalcooperation might develop from an originalshort-runutilitymaximizing perspective (1984). Douglass North (1981), Samuel Popkin(1979), Robert Bates (1988), and others combine rational choice modelling with sociological analysisin their studies of thirdworld development and historicalprocess. That this view is on the defensive is reflected in recent comments of scholars with unquestionablescientificcredentials.Thus Herbert Simon challengesthe rationalchoice assumptionof this literature:
of rationalhomopsychologicus cognitivepsychology.It makesa differencefor research,but it also makes a differencefor the proper designof politicalinstitutions. JamesMadisonwas well aware of that, and in the pages of the Federalist Papers,he opted for this view of the humancondition; "As there is a degree of depravityin mankind whichrequiresa certaindegree of circumspection and distrust, so there are other qualitiesin human nature which justifya certain portion of esteem and confidence:"-a balancedand realisticview, we may concede, of bounded human and its accompanying frailtiesof motive and reason. (303) rationality

are studying nearly the omniscient homo of economicus rational choicetheoryor the boundedly

It makes a differenceto research, a very largedifference,to our researchstrategywhether we

eM,ltc'Olh5~ai^

0 S4i ^h^W ^VyM4"~I "iL#c fI

1k ?4,

pd>ie4d
td*4iM

p
U

te

Ae9

e ec; eeF
0i U d ;44 A Cto t
I,V

detr-A,ie Ci4e*

I,,

L4 4Li

of JamesMarchand JohanOlsen attackthe formalism the publicchoice literature."The new institutionalism an empirically is based prejudice, assertionthat what we observe in an the world is inconsistent with the ways in whichcontemporarytheories ask us to talk. . . The bureaucratic committee, and the appellatecourt are arenasfor agency,the legislative Fall 1988 833

Separate Tables contendingsocial forces, but they are also collections of standardoperating procedures and structuresthat detine and defend interests" (1984, 738). They similarly question the rationalself-interestassumptionof the publicchoice literature,arguing, actionisoftenbasedmoreon discovering self-interest undoubtedly politics, permeates Although than the behavior on calculating return the normatively expectedfromalternative appropriate in like can choices. a result,political As behavior, otherbehavior, be described termsof duties, roles,andrules.(744) obligations, The Soft Right conservativesof an old and a "neo" variety, Inthe soft-rightcell there are miscellaneous who tend to be traditionalin their methodologiesand on the rightside of the ideological spectrum. But the followers of Leo Strauss in politicaltheory are a distinctivebreed The enlightenmentand the indeed. Their methodologicalconservatismis unambiguous. scientificrevolutionare the arch-enemy.Highon their list of targets is the value free and ethicallyneutralpoliticalscience of MaxWeber. As Leo Straussput it, "Moralobtuseness The more seriouswe are as socialscientists is the necessaryconditionfor scientific analysis. to the more completelywe develop withinourselvesa state of indifference any goal, or to aimlessnessand drifting,a state of what may be called nihilism" (1959, 19). But political science is not only amoral, it is not really productive of knowledge. Again Leo Strauss, "Generallyspeaking,one may wonder whether the new politicalscience has broughtto lightanythingof politicalimportancewhich intelligentpoliticalpractitionerswith a deep knowledge of history, nay intelligentand educated journalists,to say nothingof the old politicalscientists, did not know at least as well beforehand"(in Storing, 1962, 312).

and "sociologyof knowledge" interpretationsof The Straussians reject all "historicist" texts is contained in what has been politicaltheory. The true meaningof philosophical written. The politicalphilosophermust have the skilland insightnecessaryto explicatethis originalmeaning.The ultimatetruth can be located in the writingsof the originalclassic in shorn of philosophers,and particularly the writingsof Plato-in his Socraticrationalism all contingency.Truths transcend time, place, and context. Post-Machiavellian political and the decay of civicvirtue; "behavioral" philosophyhas led to moralrelativism political science is the debased product of this moral decline. of Inthe recent celebrationsof the 200th anniversary the Constitution,the Straussians, intent"school of constitutional of as one mightexpect, were in the vanguard the "original literatureon the Coninterpretation.Gordon Wood, in a recent review of the Straussian as stitution,(1988) points out that for such Straussians Gary McDowelland Walter Berns the whole truthabout the Constitutionis containedinthe constitutional text, and perhaps the record of the debates, and the FederalistPapers.Wood pointsout that the Straussian derived rights commitment to "naturalright," leads them to distrust of all historically Straussians naturalrightto property postulated by the Foundersmay be groundsfor the backthe modernwelfarestate. The moralmodel regimefor manyStraussians the is rolling Platonicaristocracy,or as second-best, Aristotelian"mixedgovernment."Theirprogram of action is a call for an intellectualelite which will bringus back to first principles. The Hard Left a There is finally hardleft school, whichemploys scientificmethodologyin testing propositionsderivedfrom socialistand dependencytheories. However, the moment one makes
834 ". . . particularly those recently discovered by the Supreme Court" (1988, 39). For some

PS: Political Science and Politics

Separate Tables and beliefsof left ideologies,one hasgone part of the explicitand testable the assumptions of way toward rejectingthe anti-professionalism the left. And this is reflected in the nerand vousness of leadingsocialistand dependency theorists over quantification the testing of hypotheses. Thus ChristopherChase-Dunn,one of the leadingworld system quantifiers, pleads with his colleagues,"My concern is that we not become bogged down in a sterile debate between 'historicists'and 'social scientists,' or between quantitativeand qualitativeresearchers.The 'ethnic' boundariesmay provide us with much materialfor of spiriteddialogue,but a real understanding the world system will requirethat we transcend methodological sectarianism" (1982, 181).The leadingdependencytheoristssuchas the Cardoso and Fagenraise serious questions regarding validityof "scientific type, quantitative" studies of dependency propositions. For reasons not clearly specified such research is "premature,"or misses the point. Thus, they probablywould not accept as valid the findingsof the Sylvan,Snidal,Russett, Jackson,and Duvall(1982) group which tested a formal model of "dependencia"on a world-wide set of dependent countriesin results. Nevertheless the the 1970-75period, and came up with mixed and inconclusive politicalsciendependency and world system quantifiersand econometricians,including tists and sociologists such as Chase-Dunn(1977) and Rubinson(1979), Albert Bergesen on (1980), Volker Bornschier (1981) and others, are carrying quantitativestudies oriented toward the demonstrationof the validityof world system and dependency propositions. Getting Our Professional History Straight Most politicalscientistswould find themselves uncomfortableseated at these outlying tables. Havingbecome a majoracademicprofessiononly in the last two or three generations, we are not about to cast off our badges of professionalintegrityby turningour researchand teachinginto political advocacy.Thisis reflected in the partialdefectionfrom by anti-professionalism the hard left, who insistthat assertionsabout society and politics them explicitlyand precisely,and usingstatisticalmethods can be tested by formulating where appropriate. most of us are troubled at the preemption by the publicchoice and statistical Similarly and scientistsof the badge of professionalism, their demotion of the rest of us to a political prescientificstatus. And this concern is shared by some of the most reputable and sophisticatedof our more rigorouspoliticalscientists,who are currentlyengaged in relatthe ing to and rehabilitating older politicalscience methodologies, such as philosophical, description. legal and historicalanalysis,and institutional And there are few politicalscientistsindeed who would share the view that all political science since the sixteenth century is a deviation from the true path, and that the sole is route to professionalism throughthe exegesis of the classicaltexts of politicaltheory.

h444 4Acsi* t

t*e,

fta,

44

4?.

version It is noteworthy that each of these schools or sects presents us with a particular of Whoever controlsthe interpretation the science discipline. of the historyof the political the past in our professionalhistorywritinghas gone a longway toward controlling future. The soft left has almost pre-empted the writingof professionalpoliticalscience historyin some of us that we have recent years. I believe they may have succeeded in convincing deviated from the true path. Both Ricciand Seidelmanwould have us believe that modern politicalscience with its stress on methodology and objectivitycould only develop in the United States where for a brief intervalit appeared that liberaldemocracyand an objecwere possible. As this Americanoptimism abates, and as party and tive professionalism class antagonismsharpens inevitably,they argue, a politicallyneutral political science becomes untenable.Accordingto this view politicalscience must againbecome an active part of a political,and for some, a revolutionarymovement. Fall 1988 835

Separate Tables The view of professionalhistory presented by the hard right is a very foreshortened one. Accordingto this view, prior to the introductionof mathematical,statistical,and experimental methodologies there was no politicalscience and theory in the proper sense. Butthe largemethodologically eclectic majorityof political scientists,and those who are committed to the control of ideologicalbias in the conduct of professional work-what I callthe 'Cafeteria of the center"'-ought not to concede the writingof disciplinary history to any one of these schools. The historyof politicalscience does not lead to any one of mixed and objectivity-aspiring these separate tables, but rather to the methodologically of scholarship the center.

4 tHA/4W tcJf 0t, e4 .*

?Ue

w^e,fA Oet4

tt4

e4/c

4 <w Mm t^J^

4 le c^h^e ^tc
4 44o <^ ^He4^?^i

Ily er??
4

ow

It is not correct to arguethat political science deviated from classical politicalphilosophy in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,and that it has been on the wrong path ever since. Nor is it correct to attribute to American politicalscience the effort to separate cannot legitimatelyclaim exclusive politicaltheory from politicalaction. The Straussians Greek philosophy.The scientificimpulsein politicalstudies had its beginoriginin classical nings among the classicalGreek philosophers.Robert Dahl, for my money, is a more legitimatefollower of Aristotle than is Leo Strauss. There is a politicalsociologicaltraditiongoing all the way back to Plato and Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu,Hume, continuingthrough Polybius,Cicero, Machiavelli, Rousseau,Tocqueville, Comte, Marx, Pareto, Durkheim,Weber and continuingup to which sought, and seeks, to relate Dahl, Lipset, Rokkan,Sartori, Moore, and Lijphart, socioeconomic conditionsto politicalconstitutionsand institutional arrangements,and to relate these structuralcharacteristics policy propensitiesin war and peace. to Our founding fathers belonged to this tradition. Alexander Hamilton observed in Federalist "The science of politics . . . like most other sciences, has received great 9, improvement. The efficacy of various principlesis now well understood, which were either not knownat all, or imperfectly knownto the ancients"(1937). And in Federalist 31 Hamiltondeals with the perennial moraland political studies questionof just how scientific could be. He concludes, of it that the principles moraland political knowledge Though cannotbe pretended have,in the with better yet general, samedegreeof certainty thoseof the mathematics, theyhavemuch in claims thisrespectthan. we should disposed allowthem.(ibid.,189) be to It is worth notingthat the hard science-soft science polarity,which we have been led to assume is a recent phenomenon attributableto the heresy of the Americanbehavioral since its origins. movement, has in fact been endemic to the discipline Inthe 19thand early20th centuriesAugusteComte, Marxand Engelsand their followers, Max Weber, EmileDurkheim,VilfredoPareto, and others treated politicsin larger social science perspectives, with law-likeregularities At and necessary relationships. the turn of the 20th centuryJohnRobert Seeley and Otto Hintze, MoissayeOstrogorski,and Roberto Michelsall produced what they considered to be "scientificlaws" of politicsfreedom in between external pressureand internal Seeley and Hintzeon the relationship the development of the nation states of Western Europe; Ostrogorski, on the incomof politicalpartyand democracywhichhe derivedfrom a patibility the mass-bureaucratic 836 PS: Political Science and Politics

Separate Tables and comparativestudy of the rise of the British Americanparty systems; and Michels,on for the "iron law of oligarchy,"the propensityin large bureaucratic organizations power case study of the to gravitateto the top leadership,which he derived from his "critical" SocialDemocraticPartyof Germany.More recently,Duverger's"law"of the relationship between the electoral and party systems also came from Europe. science it was common pracAmong the early pioneersof modern professionalpolitical as ThusSir tice to speak of this branchof scholarship a "science"from the very beginning. FrederickPollockand JohnRobert Seeley, the first lecturing from Oxford and the Royal the Institution, second from Cambridge,entitled their books TheHistory the Scienceof of to Science(1896), respectively.What these early Politics (1890) and An Introduction Political between the writers meant by "science" varied from case to case. Pollockdistinguishes naturaland moral sciences. inexactness the moral of is sciences not the faultof the menwho have .. . [T]hecomparative to as devotedtheirabilities them,butdepends, Aristotle of saw, already on the nature theirsubject matter.(1890,5) For JohnRobert Seeley politicalscience was to be a body of propositionsdrawnfrom historicalknowledge. He expected a takeoff in the development of political science in because of the development of historiography the 19thcentury.Ifthe modernswere to do so much better than Locke, Hobbes, and Montesquieu,it was because their historical data base was much richer. science into the CambridgeTripos, it meant learnFor Seeley, who introducedpolitical ... ingto ". . . reason, generalize,define, and distinguish as well as collecting,authenticatscience. "Ifwe facts ..." These two processes constitutedpolitical ing, and investigating neglectthe first process, we shallaccumulatefacts to littlepurpose, because we shallhave facts which are important from those which are unno test by which to distinguish important;and of course, if we neglect the second process, our reasoningswill be baseless, and we shallbut weave scholasticcobwebs" (1896, 27-8).

.e.

weetwf in tug sols

te a

tca

There were two schools of thought in the 19th and early 20th century social sciences the regarding degree or kindof science whichwas possible.The work of AugusteComte, between the socialand the "natural" KarlMarx,and VilfredoPareto makes no distinction laws. On the other hand sciences. Bothgroupsof sciencessoughtuniformities, regularities, the notion of a socialscience whichwould consist of ". .. a closed system of concepts, in validclassification, and universally which realityis synthesizedin some sort of permanently and from which it can againbe deduced. . ." was viewed as entirelymeaningless Max by Weber. The towardseternity. cultural eventsflowsunendingly The streamof immeasurable problems for and stream concrete eventswhich of areainthe infinite meaning significance us, i.e. acquires The conto are whichbecomesan "historical individual" constantly subject change. intellectual shift.(1949,80) texts fromwhichit is viewedandscientifically analyzed of The "lawfulness" humaninteractionis of a differentorder for MaxWeber. The subject matter of the social sciences-human action-involves value orientation, memory and and probabililearning,which can only yield "soft" regularities,"objective possibilities" Fall 1988 837
which move men form themselvesever anew and in differentcolors, and the boundariesof that

Separate Tables ties. Culturalchange may attenuate or even dissolve these relationships. DurkSimilarly heim viewed culturalphenomena as too complex and open to humancreativityto lend themselves to the same degree of causalcertaintyas the naturalsciences. science in the United States-from 1900 political Duringthe firstdecades of professional to the 1930s-two scholars, Merriamand Catlin,the first as Americanas apple pie, the second a temporarilytransplantedEnglishman-tookthe lead in advocatingthe introduction of scientificmethods and standardsin the study of politics. Merriam'scontribution and promotional.He advocated, recruited personnel, and was primarily programmatic, funded a particular researchprogramat the Universityof Chicago.He also was a founder of the Social Science ResearchCouncil. Catlinwrote on methodologicalquestions, differentiatingbetween historyand politicalscience, and locatingpoliticalscience among the social sciences.

In his 1921 manifesto, "The Present State of the Study of Politics," Merriam(1925) advocated the introductionof psychologicaland sociologicalinsightsinto the study of politicalinstitutionsand processes, and of the introductionof statisticalmethods in an effort to enhance the rigorof politicalanalysis.Nowhere in this early call to professional growth and improvement is there anything approximatinga discussion of scientific science ratherthan talkabout it. And indeed, in methodology. He proposed to do political the decades followingat the Universityof Chicago,a research programunfoldedexemand social-psychological plifyingMerriam'sstress on empiricalresearch, quantification, interpretation.The scholarsproduced by this programconstituted a substantialpart of the nucleusof the post-World War "behavioralmovement." treatment of politics" George Catlinmay have been the firstto speak of a "behaviorist (1927, xi), and in his argumentabout a science of politicsseems to dispose of all of those objections which would differentiatesocial and human subject matters from those of naturalscience. But he is hardlysanguineabout the prospects of science.

builtup thisstructure. (1927, 142-43). Thus BernardCrick's(1959) argumentthat it was the behavioralmovement in American politicalscience, and particularly Chicagoschool that was responsiblefor leading the 838 PS: Political Science and Politics

clues to the discoveryof permanentforms and generalprinciples action. ... It is reasonableto of science will prove to be more than this, that it willgive us some insightinto expect that political the possibility controlling socialsituation,and willshow us, if not what it is wise to do, at of the least what, humannature beingwhat it is, it is unwiseto do, because such action willcut across the grainof the socialstructureand athwartthe linesof activityof the deeper forces whichhave

mustfor the presentconfineitselfto the humbletask of collecting, Politics where possible and the and measuring, sorting historical material, andcontemporary; following probable past up

Separate Tables politicalscience down the gardenpath of scientismcannot bear carefulexaminationof the sources. In both Europeand America meta-methodological opinion has been divided on this question. It would be hard to find more hard science oriented scholarsthan Comte, Marx, Pareto, and Freud. Durkheimand Weber, while fullycommitted to the pursuitof science, clearlyrecognizedthat the socialscientistdealt with a subjectmatter less tractahardscience forms of explanation.Thispolemicdiffusedto the United ble to covering-law States in the course of the twentieth century.
4.

44
t

0...
V ?4c 44t
a4?i.

la?t

?4^4t^ !u^4e efasp4to

Crick'sattributionof this scientificorientationto Chicago populistsdoes not hold up when we examine the evidence. One has to read the Tocquevillecorrespondence(1962) to appreciate how close that brilliantinterpreter of American democracy, a century before the Chicagoschool saw the lightof day, came to doing an opinion survey in his travels around the country. As he talked to a steamboat captain on the Mississippi, to farmers in the interior,to bourgeois dinnercompanionson the eastern seabord, and to officeholdersin Washington,D.C., samplingthe Americanpopulationwas clearlyon his mind. KarlMarxdrew up a six-page questionnairefor the study of the livingconditions, workingconditions,attitudes, and beliefsof the Frenchworkingclass in the early 1880s.A The largenumberof copies were distributedto socialistsand workingclassorganizations. data gatheredwere to be used in the forthcoming generalelection (I 880). InMaxWeber's working papers for his study of the peasantry in East Prussiathere is evidence that he executed a survey of Polishand German peasant attitudes. And in plannedand partially his study of comparative religion he used a formal two-by-two table-worldlinessunworldliness,asceticism-mysticism-asa way of generatinghypotheses about the relationship between religiousethics and economic attitudes. Most of the important discoveries in the development of statistics were made by Europeans.La Place and Condorcet were Frenchmen;the Bernoullifamilywere Swiss; Pareto was an Italian;Markova Bayes, Galton, Pearson, and Fisherwere Englishmen; Russian. The first "publicchoice" theorist was the Welshman, DuncanBlack(1958). The view that the quantitativeapproach to social science analysiswas peculiarlyAmerican doesn't stand up to the historical Americanwas the improverecord. What was peculiarly ment in, and the applicationof, quantitativemethods as in survey research, content analysis,aggregatestatistical analysis,mathematical modellingand the like, and the pursuit in empiricaldepth of psychological and sociologicalhypotheses largelygenerated in the Europeansocial science literature.

74 v4w t^t tV44

0 44

^U^4M/e

te
I

44%e+

At the darkest moment in Europeanhistory-in the 1930s-there was a strong infusion of Europeansocialscience into the United States throughrefugeessuchas PaulLazarsfeld, KurtLewin,MarieJahoda,WolfgangKohler,HansSpeier, ErichFromm,FranzNeumann, Otto Kircheimer, Leo Lowenthal,FranzAlexander, HannahArendt, Hans Morgenthau, Leo Strauss,and many others. It should be quite clear from this litanyof names that this emigrationcarriedthe varioussocial science polemicswithinit, and that the counterposition of a Europeanand an Americanapproachto socialscience aroundthe issueof humanist vs. scientificscholarship simplynot bear the lightof day. There is clear continuity will Fall 1988
839

Separate Tables from the Europeanbackground the growth of the socialsciencesand political to science in the United States. This broad traditionof politicalscience beginning with the Greeks and continuing to up the creative scholarsof our own generation,is the historically correct versionof our disciplinaryhistory. The criticaland Marxistschools throw in the professionalsponge. Confirmfrontingthis simplistic temptation we need to have a deep-rooted and unshakable ness in our commitmentto the searchfor objectivity.The callfor 'relevance" associated with "post-behavioralism" in impliesa greater concernfor policyimplications our scholarcourse of politicalaction. A ly work, but it cannot implya commitment to a particular a kind. politicalscientistis not necessarily socialist,and surelynot a socialistof a particular

T hu4
4

dtle st4e

hw4 tE Be*

44Ws

t^4 U4eE 5t4e4.

The version of disciplinary historypresented to us in Straussian politicalphilosophycannot be taken seriously.The hard-nosedpublicchoice version of our historymistakestechscience is open to all methods that illuminate the niquefor substance.Mainstream political world of politicsand publicpolicy. It will not turn its back on the illumination get from we our older methodologiesjust because it now can employ the powerfultools of statistics and mathematics. We have good groundsfor professionalpride in the development of politicalscience in the last decades. And as Americanswe have made importantcontributions an age-old, to world-wideeffort to bringthe power of knowledgeto bear on the tragicdilemmasof the world of politics.

About the Author

GabrielA. Almond is professor of political science emeritusat StanfordUniversity.He was president of the APSAin 1965-66.Since 1977 APSAhas given a dissertationaward at its annualmeeting in honor of ProfessorAlmond.

Note
*An earlierversion of this paper was delivered as the Distinguished SocialScience Lectureat the Northern Illinois on Universityat DeKaib,Illinois, November 13, 1987.

References
Anderson, Perry. 1976. Considerations WesternMarxism. on London:New Left Books.

Axelrod,Robert.1984.TheEvolution Cooperation. York: New Basic Books. of

Bates, Robert. 1988.Macro-Political in Duke University Economy the Field Development. of Programin International PoliticalEconomy,WorkingPaper No. 40 (June). Bergesen, Albert. 1980. "The Class Structureof the World System." In Contending to Approaches WorldSystemAnalysis, WilliamR. Thompson. BeverlyHills,Calif.:Sage Publications. ed. Black,Duncan. 1958. TheTheory Committees Elections. and of Cambridge,England: CambridgeUniversity Press. Bornschier,Volker, and J. P. Hoby. 1981. "EconomicPolicy and Multi-National Corporationsin Development; The MeasurableImpacts in Cross National Perspective." SocialProblems, 28: 363-377.

840

PS: Political Science and Politics

Separate Tables
Evidenceof Effectsof Bornschier, Volker, C. Chase-Dunn,and R. Rubinson.1978. "Cross-national ForeignAid and Investmenton Development." American 84(3): 207-222. journalof Sociology, in Buchanan, Wagner. 1977. Democracy Deficit.New York: Academic Press. James,and Richard of West Sussex:Institute EconomicAffairs. Buchanan, James. 1978. TheEconomics Politics. Lancing, of in and America. BerkeCardoso, Fernando,and Enzo Faletto. 1979. Dependency Development Latin Press. ley: Universityof California Catlin,George E. G. 1927. TheScienceand Methodof Politics. Hamden, Conn.: Anchor Books. and Chase-Dunn,Christopher.1982. "Commentary."InWorld System Theory Methodology, Analysis: ed. Terence Hopkinsand Immanuel Wallerstein.Beverly Hills,Calif.:Sage Publications. Scienceof Politics. Press. Crick,Bernard. 1959. TheAmerican Berkeley:Universityof California for Dahl, Robert A. 1961. "The Behavioral Science;Epitaph a Monumentto a Approachin Political SuccessfulProtest." American Political ScienceReview, 55(Dec.): 763-72. Easton, David. 1953. ThePolitical System.New York:A. A. Knopf. in New York: RandomHouse. Eulau,Heinz. 1963. The Behavioral Persuasion Politics. Fagen,Richard.1978. "A Funny ThingHappenedon the Way to the Market;Thoughtson Extending Dependency Ideas." International Organization, 32(l): 287-300. New York: BasicBooks. Geertz, Clifford. 1972. TheInterpretation Cultures. of Foundation. Hamilton,Alexander. 1937. TheFederalist. Washington,D.C.: NationalHome Library to to Horkheimer Habermas.Berkeley:Universityof Held, David. 1980. Introduction Critical Theory: California Press. as Hirschman,Albert. 1970. "The Search for Paradigms a Hindranceto Understanding."World 329-343. Politics, 22(3, March): Factorsin Political March, Organizational James,and JohanOlsen. 1984. "The New Institutionalism; Life."American Political ScienceReview, 78(3 Sept.): 734-750. Marx, Karl. 1880. EnquieteOuvriere. In La RevueSocialiste April). (20 Science Political Merriam,CharlesE. 1921. "The Present State in the Study of Politics."American Review,15(May):173-185. Mitchell,William. 1988. Virginia, Rochester, and Bloomington: Twenty-fiveYears of PublicChoice and Political Science. PublicChoice,56: 101-119. New York:W. W. Norton. and North, Douglass. 1981. Structure Changein Economic History. and Pateman, Carole. 1970. Participation Democratic Theory. Cambridge,England: CambridgeUniversity Press. Chichester:Wiley. Pateman,Carole. 1979. The Problem Political Obligation. of London:Macmillan. Pollock,Frederick.1890. History the Scienceof Politics. of Peasant. Berkeley,Calif.:Universityof California Press. Popkin,Samuel. 1979. TheRational Rattigan,Terence. 1955. SeparateTables.New York: RandomHouse. Science.New Haven, Conn.: Yale UniversityPress. Ricci,David. 1984. The Tragedy Political of San Freeman. Riker,William. 1982. Liberalism AgainstPopulism. Francisco: Rubinson,Richard,and C. Chase-Dunn. 1979. Cycles, Trends, and New Departures in World and System Development. In NationalDevelopment WorldSystems,ed. J. W. Meyer and M. T. Hannan.Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress. to Science.London:Macmillan. Seeley, John Robert. 1896. Introduction Political Seidelman, Raymond. 1985. DisenchantedRealists.Albany, N.Y.: State Universityof New York Press. Simon, Herbert. 1985. Human Nature in Politics: The Dialogue of Psychology with Political Science. American Political ScienceReview, 79(2 June):293-304. and Significance the Frankfurt School:A MarxistPerspective. London: Slater, Philip. 1977. Origin of Routledge, Kegan,Paul. The Free Press. Strauss,Leo. 1959. What Is Political Glencoe, IIl.: Philosophy? Strauss, Leo. 1972. PoliticalPhilosophyand the Crisis of Our Time. In The Post Behavioral Era, ed. George Grahamand George Carey. New York:Holt, Rinehartand Winston, pp. 217-242. Sylvan, David, Duncan Snidal,et al. 1983. The PeripheralEconomy: Penetrationand Economic to ed. Distortion, 1970-1975.InContending Approaches World System Analysis, William Thompson. BeverlyHills,Calif.:Sage Publications. A Schoolin WesternMarxism: Critical Reader.London:New Therborn, Goran. 1977. fhe Frankfurt Left Books. Tocqueville,Alexid de. 1962.journeyto America.New Haven, Conn.: Yale UniversityPress. Truman, David. 1955. The Impactof the Revolutionin BehavioralScience on PoliticalScience. Lectures, Brookings Washington,D.C.: BrookingsInstitution, 202-231. pp. Waltzer,Michael.1970. Obligations. Cambridge,Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress. Walter, Michael.1983. Spheres justice.New York: BasicBooks. of

Fall 1988

841

Statistics

in

Society

American Statistical Association Winter Conferenc

San Diego, California * January 4-6, 1989 Sheraton Harbor Island East
Featured Speakers

Tutorial

Q Leo A. Goodman, University of California, Be Q Clive Granger, University of California, San D [ Donald B. Rubin, Harvard University "Meta-Analysis," Ingram Olkin, Stanford University

The program will also feature invited paper sessions on specialized topics in business statistics, survey research methods; numerous contributed paper sessions, poster sessions, and other co courses. Some of the topics for invitedsessions include

Q MultilevelAnalysis Q Regression Analysis and SalaryEquity co

X~

?.

D-I

2. =
,

Q Social Experiments [ SurvivalAnalysis: Applicationsto Economic Problems Q Application of TimeSeries Methods to Survey Data Allscientistsinterestedin the statistical aspects of business,economics, the social sciences, and
sciences are welcome.
n

rQ Causal Modeling Q Cognitive Aspects of Survey Methodology

issue of A Registration, housing, and employmentformswill appear in the September-October or Nonmembersmay call the ASA officeat (703) 684-1221 to requestthis material write to th VA Association, 1429 Duke St., Alexandria, 22314-3402.
I. , Kn