Skip to main content

Regenerating the APSA with a Focus on Feelings

The Political Science Profession can be re-oriented to strive to make a better world, country by country. Political scientists all over the world can do research and writing which assesses the “Operational Goodness” of any political system.

The well-established definition of the “political system,” by David Easton, can serve as a standard, or norm, by which to assess the “goodness” of a political system, and for comparing the operational goodness of different political systems.

This approach is not a matter of moral approval or approbation, but more like an engineer assessing the operational goodness of a complex machine, like a computer.

One of the main ways for assessing the operational goodness of any political system is to find out how the people living in the system feel about it. That is, look at what Easton calls “politically relevant feelings.”

What is the actual lived experience of a system’s membership? Does that result in anger, alienation, or "political happiness"?

Only interpretive and qualitative methods, not those of positivism, can get at the truth of this. This approach makes the authentic experience of the affected people a key indicator of the system’s goodness.

If this is true, then the old “is/ought” separation can be bridged, and political scientists will have the grounds needed to rise above mere subjectivity when criticizing a political system.

Once the operational goodness of a political system has been assessed, ways to make it better can be sought.

Just as Public Health Science has lead in improving public health, so political science can take the lead in finding ways to upgrade the below par performance of any political system.

For an illustration of how a focus on feelings can be a part of method, using China as an example see,

China: Assessing the Goodness of a Political System with Chinese Characteristics

https://preprints.apsanet.org/engage/apsa/article-details/63056b2e11986c67ce43949e 

Learn more about assessing political system operational goodness at,

Normative Political Science – How to Measure the Goodness of a Political System https://doi.org/10.33774/apsa-2021-f9mvn

(Both are free, safe downloads from APSA Preprints and Cambridge University Press.)

Bill Kelleher

@InterpretivePo1

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How Reappraising David Easton can make Political Science Research more Exciting.

D avid Easton’s theory of the political system has long been  misrepresented  as requiring a mechanistic theory of causation, thus dehumanizing political behavior. The widespread claim that his vision was of the political system as striving for equilibrium is totally false.   Easton was a humanist. He envisioned human political behavior as a consequence of the meanings people create volitionally in their own minds and social context. He rejected the automaton theory of political behavior.     He also understood the relationship between system performance and public opinion and sentience. A well operating system will likely result in public satisfaction and support. Poor operation, the opposite.   That, in turn, implies a  standard,  or norm, by which to assess how well a political system is performing. Indeed, Easton's theory of the empirical political system can also be used as a way to assess how well a political system is operating. Efficiency and effectiveness are elements to b
Post a Comment
Read more

Causation, Not Correlation, in Interpretive Political Science

Using David Easton’s theory of the political system as my interpretive framework, in this post I will offer a non-mechanistic theory of how human political behavior can be “caused.” I will argue that, for Interpretive Political Science, reasons can be causes of political behavior. Indeed, respect for the subject matter – human political behavior – requires this causal theory. After all, people are not machines. “Reasons” will be understood as units of meaning in the minds of people. I will offer examples of such causal relations in the operations of two political systems, China and Peru. Hypothesis: The operation of a political system will tend to provide reasons which explain the political sentience of the public. A well-functioning political system will probably be the reason for high approval ratings among its membership. Likewise, a poorly functioning system will probably be the reason for low approval ratings. China In the past 40 years the Chinese political system hel
Post a Comment
Read more

Does Political Science Force Graduate Students into a Career of Irrelevancy?

Introduction In a 2014 New York Times op ed, columnist Nicholas Kristof drew numerous defensive responses when he criticized political science for having very little “practical impact” in “the real world of politics.” [1] Rather than exercising civic leadership, political science has been most noticeably AWOL from public policy debates since WWII, he claims. And, in his view, there are “fewer public intellectuals on American university campuses today than a generation ago.” How does he account for this absence? Primarily, it is due to the academic interest in pursuing the quantitative approach in political science research. This kind of research is too often unintelligible to both the politically interested general public and the policy making community. Also, the “value neutrality” required for such studies prohibits advocacy. The pattern persists, in part, because graduate students must conform to the expectations of their professors, as a requirement for a successful academic
Post a Comment
Read more