O P Gauba Summary: Approaches to the Study of Politics | PSIR Optional for UPSC PDF Download

Difference Between Method and Approach

Political Inquiry

Method: A method is a specific way of doing something, especially in systematic studies to gather reliable knowledge and draw valid conclusions. Examples include:

• Scientific Method
• Inductive Method
• Deductive Method
• Comparative Method

Approach: An approach is broader than a method. It includes not just how to inquire (the method) but also what to focus on in the study (what to inquire). It involves criteria for selecting problems and relevant data. For instance:

• Behavioral Approach: Linked to the scientific method.
• Normative Approach: Associated with philosophical methods.
• Empirical Approach: Leads to various political analyses and models.

Traditional vs Contemporary Approaches to the Study of Politics

Traditional Approaches

Traditional approaches to the study of politics were dominant before the Second World War. They are still relevant today, although not as preferred as contemporary approaches. These methods focus on:

• The study of politics through philosophy, history, law, and institutions.

Contemporary Approaches

Contemporary approaches emerged after the Second World War, focusing on politics as a process. They examine the actions of various actors in political contexts and use scientific methods to analyse political phenomena. Key aspects include:

• Behavioral Approach: Central to contemporary political science.
• Interdisciplinary Approach: Integrates insights from other social sciences to enrich political studies.

Distinction between Traditional and Contemporary Approaches

In the past, it was believed that contemporary approaches focused on facts while traditional approaches focused on values. However, this view is outdated. The distinction between empirical and normative approaches is not the same as the difference between traditional and contemporary approaches.

Empirical and Normative Approaches

The empirical approach aims to discover and describe facts about political phenomena, making statements about what 'is' based on observable evidence. For instance, studying the causes of political revolutions through historical data falls under this approach.

The normative approach seeks to establish and recommend values about what 'ought to be' or 'should be.' It reflects preferences for certain political orders based on moral principles or ideals. For example, defining justice in terms of equality and fairness illustrates a normative perspective.

The key distinction between the two approaches lies in the type of statements made:

• Empirical statements deal with observable situations that can be verified.
• Normative statements express preferences that cannot be empirically verified.

For example, saying "everyone ought to vote in elections to make democracy work" is an empirical statement, while defining justice involves normative preferences.

Critique of Normative Approach

Critics argue that the empirical approach is objective, while the normative approach is subjective. However, this perspective is biased. Different schools of thought can engage in dialogue to defend their interpretations of concepts like freedom, equality, and justice.

Terminology and Scientific Principles

The terms used by both approaches, such as 'true or false' and 'right or wrong,' can be confusing. It’s essential to note that scientific principles are often tentative and subject to change, just like normative principles. In politics, decisions are often made based on the best available evidence, even without absolute certainty.

Conclusion

The empirical and normative approaches provide different but complementary views on political phenomena. The empirical approach focuses on descriptive analysis, while the normative approach advocates for certain values and principles. Understanding the differences between these approaches is vital for effectively analysing and interpreting political issues.

Difference Between Method and Approach

Analytical Approach

• The terms method and approach are often used loosely and sometimes interchangeably in social sciences.
• However, there is a difference between the two.
• Method is a general term that describes a specific way of doing something.
• In a systematic study, a method is the procedure of inquiry used to obtain reliable knowledge and draw trustworthy conclusions.
• Examples of methods include the scientific method, inductive method, deductive method, and comparative method.
• On the other hand, an approach is a broader term that includes not only the method (how to inquire) but also the focus of the study (what to inquire) to understand a phenomenon.
• According to Vernon Van Dyke, an approach involves criteria for selecting problems and relevant data, while methods are procedures for obtaining and using data.
• An approach is usually linked to a specific method, whereas a method is not always connected to a particular approach.
• For example, the behavioural approach is associated with the scientific method, while the normative approach is connected to the philosophical method.
• Similarly, the philosophical and historical approaches suggest using the philosophical and historical methods, respectively, while indicating their respective focus of study.
• The empirical approach to studying politics leads to political analysis, which includes various models such as systems analysis, structural-functional analysis, and decision-making analysis, commonly referred to as approaches.

Traditional Approaches

Traditional approaches to the study of politics were dominant before the Second World War. These approaches remain relevant today, even though they are less favoured by supporters of contemporary methods. They focus on studying politics through the lenses of philosophy, history, law, and institutions.

Contemporary Approaches

Political Dynamics

• Contemporary Approaches emerged after the Second World War and emphasised the study of politics as a process.
• These approaches focus on the behaviour of different actors in a political situation and use scientific methods to analyse political phenomena.
• A key aspect of contemporary political science is the behavioural approach.
• Interdisciplinary Approach is another contemporary approach that seeks to enrich the study of politics by incorporating relevant insights from other social sciences.

Empirical and Normative Approaches

• The empirical approach is mostly descriptive, while the normative approach is primarily prescriptive.
• The empirical approach aims to discover unchangeable laws, like the law of gravitational force, which describes natural phenomena that operate independently of human influence and can only be described.
• In contrast, the normative approach deals with laws and conditions created or adopted by human society, which are changeable, such as laws governing property and public order.

Distinction Between Traditional and Contemporary Approaches

• A few decades ago, it was believed that contemporary approaches focused on facts while traditional approaches focused on values.
• However, this distinction is no longer widely accepted.
• The difference between empirical and normative approaches cannot be equated with the distinction between traditional and contemporary approaches.

• Behavioralism is an approach to studying political events that focuses on the behavior of political participants, such as leaders, aspirants, and voters. It was popularized by American political scientists after World War II but has its roots in earlier works by Graham Wallas and Arthur Bentley.
• Graham Wallas and Arthur Bentley were pioneers in studying the informal aspects of politics, emphasizing the need for a realistic understanding of political behavior influenced by modern psychology. Wallas criticized the classical economists' view of humans as purely rational beings driven by self-interest, highlighting the importance of psychological factors in political actions. Bentley, on the other hand, focused on the activities of informal groups in politics, laying the groundwork for the group approach to political analysis.
• Harold D. Lasswell made significant contributions to the empirical study of politics by analyzing power dynamics, further advancing the behavioralist approach. This shift marked a departure from formal and normative approaches to studying politics, emphasizing the actual behaviors of political participants. Behavioralism encompasses a broader range of topics beyond just political behavior, although that remains its central focus.

Easton’s systems analysis is a comprehensive framework in political science that views politics as a system of interrelated parts. Here’s an overview of its key aspects:

• Political System as a Whole: Easton emphasizes studying the political system in its entirety, considering how various components interact and influence each other.
• Inputs and Outputs: The framework focuses on the inputs (demands and supports from the environment) and outputs (decisions and actions) of the political system, highlighting the flow of information and resources.
• Feedback Mechanism: Easton’s model includes a feedback loop, where outputs affect future inputs, ensuring the system’s adaptability and responsiveness to changes.
• Environment: The political system is not isolated; it interacts with its environment, which includes social, economic, and cultural factors that influence political behaviour and decision-making.
• Dynamics of Change: Easton’s systems analysis accounts for the dynamic nature of political systems, where changes in one part can lead to significant alterations in others, ensuring a holistic understanding of political processes.

Social Dynamics Analysis