Science of Politics: old trends and new approaches

By
Mohammed Khalid
Department of Evening Studies
Panjab University, Chandigarh
mdkhalidchd@yahoo.com

Political Science as a subject is an organized body of knowledge about the

state and government. It analyses the public policy, law and politics. It creates an
understanding about how groups of people govern themselves, how policies are
made and how to improve the governmental policies at the local, state, national and
international levels. It also concerns itself with the theory and practice of politics
and analysis of political behaviour and political systems.1 The focus of political
science is the systematic study of all the aspects of government in its broadest sense
and by the best scientific methods available. It encompasses the origins of political
regimes, their structures and functions, the ways governments discover and deal
with socio-economic problems and interaction of groups and individuals that play a
role in establishing, maintaining and changing the governments.2
The subject matter of political science has revolved around government
which is the most fundamental human institution. Before originating in the 19th
century in its present form, it was studied in the form of ‘politics’ in different parts
of the world in some form or the other. The study of politics is originally found in
ancient India and Greece. At that time much of the writings in politics were
philosophical and theoretical with its chief interest as what the government should
be? Its literature had tended to be utopian describing hypothetical ideal states and a
good life in them. Imbedded in moral and political philosophy it was concerned with
normative determination of what ought to be the characteristic of an ideal state.3
In ancient India, different texts have discussed about the intrigues and power
politics in the courts of various kings and rulers. Kautilya (also called Chankya) is
regarded as one of the earliest political thinkers, economist and king maker ancient
India had produced. He elaborated in Artha Shastra as to how the king can control a
limited sized kingdom, the ways a state’s economy should be organized, how the
ministers should be chosen and war conducted and taxation should be collected and

1
distributed. The Artha Shastra is a primary source of theory and practice of political
economy in ancient India. It is entirely practical in purpose with no overt
philosophy. It discusses the human nature, its corruptibility and the ways in which
the king can take advantage of such human weaknesses.4

Greek view of politics

Study of politics in the West can be traced back much before Plato and
Aristotle, but it was the Greeks who initiated a systematic study of Politics. 5 The
City-States (polis) in Greek world gave rise to the political philosophy of Plato and
Aristotle. The philosophy of Plato revolved around the creation of an Ideal State
with a philosopher king at the head of its administration. He opposed the institution
of family and property for the rulers and rejected democracy arguing that every body
was not fit to rule. He suggested a thorough education programme to select the
potential philosophers and train them to be perfect rulers. Plato addressed the
question of justice arguing that justice in the soul is linked to justice in the City-
State.6
Aristotle in his ‘Politics’ viewed man as a rational animal, and gave an
account of political institutions. He emphasized that perfect human virtues can be
exercised only in the perfect state and each kind of state has its own peculiar virtues
and vices. Aristotle defined the constitution as "a certain ordering of the inhabitants
of the city-state" or "the way of life" of the citizens. 7 Both Plato and Aristotle were
the philosophers of city-states and viewed politics as such in that context.

Roman view of politics

The study of politics during the Roman Empire was oriented towards
understanding history, methods of governance and description of operations of
government.8 Polybius in his Universal History elaborated as to how and why the
civilized countries of the world fell under the dominion of Rome. He listed the facts
and events and discovered the causes behind them to draw lessons for the future. 9
Titus Livius (59 BC to 17 AD), the famous Roman historian also known as Livy,
demonstrated in his historical accounts that the Rome had been destined for
greatness even in its days of humble origin in the 3rd century BC.10 Cicero (106 to 43

2
BC) the Roman statesman and a famous orator wrote extensively about the politics
and customs of ancient Rome. The Roman Empire which expanded through
conquest and annexation between third century BC and third century AD
encompassed all the lands of the Mediterranean. To control the system of
administration the Romans evolved a legal system especially the body of civil laws
(corpus juris civilis) which forms the basis of civil laws of many European countries
till the present day.11

Study of politics during the Christian era

The rise of Christianity in the first century AD had far reaching
consequences on the politics, the state structure and political power throughout the
medieval Europe. Though the Jesus announced that his religious teachings were
separate from earthly political activity and advised cultivation of unworldly
kingdom of heaven, the Christianity and its adherents were persecuted till under the
Constantine (the Roman Emperor from 306 to 337 AD), who converted to
Christianity and made it the favoured religion of the Roman Empire. 12 The fall of
Roman empire which began with the sack of Rome in 410 AD gave rise to a more
diffused arena for political study. The rise of monotheism in the Western tradition
and influence of Christianity brought to light a new space for politics and political
action. Saint Augustine of Hippo (354 to 430 AD), the most eminent advocate of
Church brought a systematic method of philosophy to Christian theology. He
confronted the charges that the fall of Roman Empire happened due to the
embracing of Christianity by Roman emperors and took upon himself the task of
stamping out heresy. In the ‘City if God’ he synthesized the contemporary political
philosophies and traditions with those of Christianity. Augustine sought to reaffirm
that the City of God was a heavenly and spiritual matter, as opposed to the earthly
and political affairs, thus redefining borders between what was religious and what
was political.13

Middle Ages and politics

3
 The Middle Ages, roughly dating from the collapse of the Roman Empire to
the dawn of Renaissance in the 15th century imply a suspension of progress and a
period of cultural stagnation in Europe. In the early Middle Ages (about 300 years
after the fall of Roman Empire) the loose confederation of European tribes began to
coalesce into kingdoms. At that time virtually no machinery of government existed
and political and economic development was local in nature. The only universal
European institution was the Christian Church, and even there a fragmentation of
authority was the rule. All power within Church hierarchy was wielded by local
bishops with Roman Pope having certain fatherly pre eminence.14
It was during the High Middle Ages (beginning around 1050 AD) that the
Roman Catholic Church organized itself into an elaborate hierarchical structure with
the Pope as its unequivocal head. It also emerged as the most sophisticated
governing institution in the Western Europe. Papacy exercised direct political
control over the domain lands of central and north Italy and through diplomacy and
the administration of justice in the extensive system of church courts it also
exercised directive powers throughout Europe. By the 13th century the monarchical
church had become an important European institution. The relationship between the
church and the state was clarified as well as contested during this period.15
During the late Middle Ages the secular state began to emerge --even though
it often was no more than an incipient national feeling-- and the struggle for
supremacy between the Church and the State became a fixture of European history
for the next few centuries. One of the results of this struggle was the intensification
of political thinking. This thought focused on the secular state in its own right,
independent of the Church or community of believers. 16 The independence of
political enquiry was an important facet of major trend in late medieval thinking.

Islam and Politics

Islam arose from Arabian Peninsula in seventh century to sway the entire
west Asia and create an ordered state. It viewed politics as noble and virtuous
because it administers all the creatures, bringing man closer to good and away from
the evil. In Islam the religion and politics are not separate and it seeks to regulate a

4
nation’s entire society, government and religious life in accordance with Qur’an and
Sunnah (practices of the Prophet) of Prophet Mohammad. Islam admits of no
sovereignty except that of God and does not recognize any law-giver other than
Him. God in Islam is not limited to his being sole object of worship in the religious
sense alone. He is also invested with complete ‘legal sovereignty’ in the sense it is
understood in jurisprudence and Political Science.17 These twin facets of the divinity
of God are the sin qua non of the Divine Entity and are also vitally interlinked so
that a negation of either ipso facto infringes the very concept of His Divinity.
Political System of Islam is based on three principles of oneness of God (towhid),
Prophethood (risala), and caliphate (khalifa). The purpose of the Islamic state is the
establishment, maintenance and development of those virtues which the Creator
wishes human life to be enriched by and the prevention and eradication of those
evils in human life which He finds abhorrent. Islamic state is not intended to be an
instrument of political administration or for the fulfillment of the collective will of
any particular set of people.18

Aristotle’s influence on the medieval notion of politics

Influenced by Aristotle, the great Iranian Islamic philosopher, Avicenna
(known as lbn Sina, 980 to 1037) was highly influenced by Aristotle. He tries to find
out philosophical reasons for the practices of religion. Of his three well known
works (the Shifa, the Siyasa and the Isharat) the Shifa contains the basic ideas of his
political philosophy. He wrote about human management at different levels --the
household, society and state. While the household consists of a husband a wife and
children, other managers of human beings are known as kings. The king has to
control and manage his state through his governors and their lords. The duties of a
king are to protect human lives to look after their needs and to administer the state.
Avicenna paid less attention to politics but in line with Greek philosophers like Plato
and Aristotle, he accepted politics as a branch of philosophy. 19 Averroes (1126-
1198) also known as lbn Rushd viewed that reason takes precedence over religion.
His extensive commentaries on the works of Aristotle were translated into Latin and
Hebrew and greatly influenced both Christian scholasticism and philosophy and the

5
Jewish philosophers of the Middle Ages. He continued Aristot1e’s tradition of
analysis and empiricism.20

The Renaissance and politics

The Renaissance which began in the 14th century Italy is regarded as the re-
birth of Europe. Dramatic political changes occurred in Europe during the
Renaissance which spread to the rest of Europe by the 16th and 17th centuries. In this
period the fragmented feudal society of Middle Ages (Church dominated and
agricultural economies) was transformed into a society increasingly dominated by
central political institutions. Renaissance theorists contended that the central task of
the government was to maintain security and peace and advocated new forms of
political organizations and behaviour, both in Italy and in the north Europe.21 It was
during this period that Italian city-states were transformed to territorial states, each
of which sought to expand at the expense of the other. By the 16 th century, Italy’s
troubles further mounted with the tendency to free politics from any relationship to
religion. This notion became an important part of thinking of a number of
distinguished Florentine writers including the best known of them --Niccolo
Machiavelli. Stimulated by the political crises of his time, Machiavelli sought to
base statecraft or the art of governance on science rather than on the Christian
principals. He focused on how to preserve the state by any effective means and
became precursor of secular political philosophy which began to emerge after
centuries of theological political thought in Europe. Considered as the inventor of
modern politics, Machiavelli accepted the principle that the end justifies the means
and it is better to be feared than loved.22
During the 16th century Europe underwent several dramatic changes as
Protestant reform movements swept through the continent. The Romam Catholic
Church and its ruling papacy could not withstand tremendous onslaught of reformers
such as Martin Luther (1483-1546) in Germany, John Kelvin (l509-l564) in France
and Huldreich Zwingli (1484-l531) in Switzerland. Though the Church launched a
strong Counter Reformation movement, it could not manage to regain the spiritual
supremacy it had lost during 16th and 17th centuries.23 The far reaching effects of

6
Reformation included the development of individualism and popular education.
Protestantism stimulated capitalism and a strong work ethics, and transformed
spiritual equality into political equality and democracy. The age of Enlightenment
during the 18th century refers to the historical intellectual movement which
advocated Reason as the primary basis of authority. Closely linked with Scientific
Revolution, it was inspired by the revolution of knowledge commenced by Galileo
(1564-1642) and Newton (1642-1727).24 It was a climate of increasing disaffection
with repressive rule and Enlightenment thinkers believed that systematic thinking
could be applied to all areas of human activity --society, government or the state.
The movement helped to create the intellectual framework for the American and
French Revolutions and led to the rise of classical liberalism, democracy and
capitalism. It pushed the study of politics beyond normative determination.25

Advent of new approaches in Political Science

The advent of political science as a university discipline began with the
naming of university departments and chairs with the title of Political Science in
1860s shortly before the Civil War in the United States. In 1857, Francis Lieber was
named the first Professor of History and Political Science at Columbia University. In
1880, first school of political science was formed at Columbia. The Subject began to
be an organized discipline when John Burgess, Frank Goodnow, Westel W
Willoughby, and others founded the American Political Science Association (APSA)
on 30th December 1903.26 The Association’s journal The American Political Science
Review (APSR) was founded in 1906 as an effort to distinguish the study of politics
from Economics and other social sciences. The APSA provided an outlet for original
research and a sense of common purpose to the students of political science. After
the creation of the Discipline, the political scientists started delineating the
boundaries of this subject and initiated their professional pursuits to make it more
relevant.
In the aftermath of World War I the earlier version of political science,
which is also called the “progressive political science” was repudiated and a new era
sought to make it more detached, scientific and methodical. The political scientists
had thought that the War will end European autocracies thus pave the way for a

7
durable peace in Europe. Instead, there began to emerge the fascist governments in
Italy and Germany and communist governments in Soviet Union. As the liberal
democracy in United States emerged badly shaken from the War, they blamed it on
the progressive political scientists for their hasty and superficial analysis and not
understanding the situation well.27 The political scientists now renewed their
dedication to establish scientific enquiry in the hope that the scientific knowledge
would emerge and contribute to improve quality of life in USA as the new findings
will be implemented in the governmental, system. Political scientists such as Charles
E Merriam and Harold D Lasswell saw themselves as social engineers with a
purpose of rational supervision of political actors. They wanted to install a
professional identity for political scientists based on a science that was organized to
aid the liberal democratic state.28 After the World War II; however, this sought
identity began to crumble as numerous new factors emerged during and after the
War. The subject remained stranded as a library based speculative and normative
discipline until the mid-20th century. For quite sometime Political Science was
disputed as a science. Critics of this notion saw the study of politics as being
primarily qualitative and normative claiming that it lacked a scientific method
necessary to be deemed as science.29

Emergence of Behavioralism
The Behavioralism had started finding roots as early as in early 1900s.
Arthur F Bentley advocated for empirical, value-free research. Bentley intended to
move the Political Science away from the traditional notions of scientific
explanation in society. He considered political science, with its 19th century reliance
on formalist studies of institutions to be obsolete and stood for studying social actors
themselves “for what they are” and “for what they represent”. He argued that social
science, then, should be empirical, measurable, progressive, and concerned with the
interaction and activity of a complex and overlapping system of social, political and
economic groupings.30 A significant role was also played in this direction by many
of those academics who had to serve the governments in various capacities and
positions during the Second World War and returned to the universities and colleges
after the war. Their war-time assignments had polished their skills in application of

8
methods of social science like survey, content analysis, statistical techniques and
other means of collecting and analyzing political data. Having seen the game of
politics closely, they used newly acquired tools to determine precisely as who gets
political power in a society, why and how they get it, and what they do with it. This
movement came to be called “behavioralism” because its proponents insisted that
objective observation and measurement be applied to the full range of human
behaviour as it manifests itself in the real world.31
Behaviorial enquiry can be found in David B Truman’s works, which
revived Bentley’s group process theory of government. The Governmental Process
offers a tool for analysis: a theory to drive systematic behavioral research. Truman’s
basic argument revolved around the notion that because every individual attempts to
become an accepted participant in a group or a set of groups, it makes sense to study
political behaviour in terms of groups and group ‘interactions.32 Another
behavioralist, Heinz Eulao, criticized the reformist (“utopian”) Political Science of
the pre-World War II era. In his ‘Behavioralism in Political Science’, he argued that
science can function only “in an environment that permits freedom of enquiry and
freedom of speech”. American liberal democracy allows such freedom and thus is
most suitable for scientific work.33 According to David Easton, “Behavioralism was
not a clearly defined movement for those who were thought to be behavioralists. It
was more clearly definable by those who were pposed to it, because they were
describing it in terms of the things within the newer trends that they found
objectionable. So, some define behavioralism as an attempt to apply the methods of
natural sciences to human behaviour, while others define it as an excessive emphasis
upon quantification and yet others regarded it as individualistic reductionism. From
the inside, the practitioners were of different mind as what it was that constituted
behavioralism […] And few of us were in agreement. Easton aspired to make
politics as a science that is working with highly abstract models that described the
regularities of patterns and processes in the political life in general. In his view, the
highest level of abstraction could make scientific generalizations about politics
possible. His main model was driven by an organist view of politics, as it was a
living object. Easton’s behavioural approach to politics proposed that a political

9
system could be seen as a delimited and fluid system of making. His theory is a
statement of what makes political systems adapt, survive, reproduce and change. His
theory was highly influential in the pluralistic tradition in political science until the
late 1960s.34
The dominance of the behavioral approach to study politics could be seen in
the field of international relations as well. It tried to personify the states and study
their behaviour. This approach has been quite visible in the realist and neo-realist
research in international politics. The field of comparative politics too was affected
by the behavioral shift as its protagonists gave away the legal institutional approach
in favour of a more quantitative analysis. Rather than explaining the similarities and
differences between political institutions the comparative politics scholars sought to
ground such institutional differences and similarities in universal terms of political
behaviour. Behavioralism remained a notable influence on the course content of
political science throughout the world from 1953 (when system theory was first
conceived by Easton) until the late l960s.35 This revolution stressed for the
systematic and rigorously scientific study of individual and group behavior.

Post-behavioralism
In 1967 the Caucus for a New Political Science was organized as a response
to behavioral hegemony. The behavioralism and its pros and cons had been
dominating for too long the discipline’s mainstream in terms of language, method
and focus of research. The Caucus wanted to make political science a more open and
expansive discipline. In 1969 David Easton responded to the aim of the Caucus in
his presidential address to the American Political Science Association (APSA).
Easton coined the term postbehavioralism and made relevance and action its
watchwords.36 Easton now wanted to make political science more relevant to and
active in society. Henceforth political science was sought to be more tolerant to
various perspectives on politics and political science. This happened due to at least
three reasons: (I) effectiveness of the Caucus for a new Political Science at forcing
the field to open up to more research interests; (2) a number of people entering the
discipline which increased the competition for recognition among political

10
scientists; (3) an urge for openness which prevailed in the discipline after the
behavioral era.37
The opponents of behaviorialism maintained that their can be no true science
of politics. They contended that any form of experimentation in which all the
variables are controlled in a political situation is not possible. At the same time the
Political Science moved towards greater depth of analysis and more sophistication
and under the social pressure continued to move towards a closer working
relationship with Sociology, economics, history, anthropology, psychology, public
administration and statistics. Political scientists sought new areas of expertise and
the discipline opened up, allowing for the creation of many new subfields. Some
political scientists developed sophisticated models of human activity to guide their
research, frequently drawing on computer technology for concepts as well as
hardware. The widespread study of politics as a system --with “inputs”, “outputs”,
and “feedback”-- is a major example of the influence of computers on the discipline
of Political Science.38
Various cleavage lines of different sorts were evident in Political Science
from the very beginning. They coalesced and exploded in the 1950s, 60s, and 1970s
sparked in large measure by the “behavioral revolution”. Harold Lasswell
envisioned political science as a ‘policy science’ actively engaged in political
process by speaking truth to power. The European, emigrant scholars who had
sought refuge in the US played a significant role in developing one particular sub-
field of political science i.e. “comparative politics”. Notwithstanding it’s distinctly
American Caste the American study of comparative politics has deep European
roots.39 The growth and development of experimental research in Political Science
has led the political scientists in the past to develop the Game Theory, Political
Economy and evolve the study of war and peace. Over the years even as Political
Science has evolved according to its own logic, it has not been isolated from the
developments in the ‘real world’ and this interplay between events and trends inside
and outside of political science has been complex.
Due to these developments, Political Science came to be a federation of
loosely connected sub fields rather than a tightly integrated field of study. Various

11
writings and research have contributed in evolution of particular sub-fields like
electoral politics, electoral behaviour, study of political parties, and transformation
of the concept of ideology in the Twentieth Century. The development of the subject
has also been due to interplay between the new methodological approaches and tools
on the one hand, and advances in theoretically based substantive understanding of
politics on the other.
Being a field concerning the theory and practice of politics and the
description and analysis of political systems and political behaviour, Political
Science began to dabble into various other sub-fields and allied disciplines. Its range
and expanse with the passage of time enormously increased.40 Perhaps the most
important and irreversible change in Political Science after the World War II was
that the scope of the discipline expanded to include the study of politics in Asia,
Africa and Latin America, the areas that had been previously ignored in favour of
Europe and North America. This trend was encouraged by the Cold War
competition between United States and the Soviet Union and its impact was more
visible in the field of international relation and politics.41
Due to the expansion of the Discipline, the subject has become so
complicated that even political scientists are unable to understand or become
comfortable with its entire range of research. So much material is published in
increasingly narrow fields that scholars in political science find it difficult to keep
up with their own subfields, much less understand and integrate other subfields.
Specialties and subspecialties continually emerge and a broader base of expertise
result. Each subfield churns vast quantities of literature. What Aristotle called the
“master science” is no longer sure of itself. It tilts to all directions and looks forward
to have a give and take relationship with all neighbouring sciences.
Within political science different debates emerged and subsided leaving their
impact on the study of the Subject. The positivists like Almond and Eckstein divided
Political Science along methodological and ideological dimensions. The positivists
shared a common belief in the unity of theory and practice and in the impossibility
of separating science and politics. In fact, the Positive Theory, going back to Comte,
had embodied a commitment to rigorous, scientific understanding of the world and

12
that it may help in gradual improvement of social life. 42 The post positivists
preferred policy analysis and that it has to differ quite substantially between the
kinds of political system in which one lives.43
Constitutive theory, a classic formulation of which was offered by Lassa
Oppenheim, emphasized that, “A state is and becomes an International Person
through recognition only and exclusively”. The constitutive conception of statehood
“deduced the legal existence of new states from the will of those already
established”, and that a state does not become a subject of international law until it
meets with the approval of others.44 Opposed to this contention, declaratory theory
emerged as a reaction to the unprincipled implications and conceptual difficulties
inherent in a strictly constitutive approach to recognition. It contended that statehood
was independent, of recognition and that the act of recognition by other states in
international system was purely declaratory. A state becomes a subject of
international law the moment it meets the conditions of statehood notwithstanding
its recognition by the international community.45

Globalization and political science

The 1990s witnessed unprecedented attempts at privatizing state owned
enterprises. It became part of a policy of economic liberalization in previously
highly regulated economies as well as a reaction to the fiscal policy challenges
imposed by international lending agencies (IMF/World Bank), European integration
and globalization of financial markets. The decade underwent a new wave of
concerns. The globalization politics gave a new task to political scientists to carry
out basic work on the causes and consequences of massive changes in international
economy, and increased flow of goods. The emphasis on the neo-liberal ideologies,
deregulation of economies, and the end of Soviet bloc entailed by Soviet
disintegration and the liberalization of trade was witnessed in the world around.
Globalisation has produced a new domestic politics, with new actors like anti-
globalization movements and new dilemmas for governments in the developed as
well developing countries. These shifts have raised fundamental questions for the
political scientists about the power of the state in a world of mobile resources and

13
new political interests and cleavages about prospects for development in the
countries which are on the margins of global economy.46
The rise of global consumerism (internet/telemarketing, trade and
commerce), emergence of global finance and currencies (Dollar, Euro), serious
thinking about the global concerns (global warming, ozone depletion, wild life
protection), controversies emerging out of outsourcing of skilled professionals and
even globalization of education (setting up of branch campuses and franchises etc.)
have greatly affected the teaching and research in political science. The international
movement of labour has a definite impact on the globalization of markets, the
production systems and political structures. The globalization studies in political
science have provided new areas of teaching and research like: political theory of
globalization; international cooperation and violent global movements; cyber space
and politics of globalization; and global systems for sustainable development. 47 The
economic impact of return migration of highly skilled professionals and study of
four “R”s of migration i.e. remittance, recruitment returns and representation has
become significant for the discipline of political science. Similarly the growing
concern about global warming influence the national and international political
structures which create new incentives for policy makers to aggressively address this
issue. It has helped the Greening of Political Science and brought environmental
studies in its ambit. Ever rising impact of mass media has led to study its influence
on politics and political processes. The political campaigns, elections and media
have come under a new focus in political science studies. Similarly, after September
11, 2001 an anti terrorism alliance vas mooted to stamp out terrorism as it was,
according to the US, posing a great threat to the West and the United States. In
Political Science terrorism, came under the focus leading to study its different
aspects like; Jihad, martyrdom and political action; insurgency and terrorism; Islam
and terrorism; and the rhetoric of international anti-terrorism etc.
In the early 21st century, a new movement called “perestroika” has emerged
within the discipline. The “perestroika” movement; begun anonymously in 2000,
calls attention to two problems in the discipline: its lack of inclusiveness and its
increasingly mathematical approach. In many ways this movement revives the

14
thinking behind the caucus for a new Political Science movement in its concern for
the apparent irrelevance of the discipline in the wider Political Science context and
its criticism of an increasingly quantitative orientation within the discipline. Those
who are active in “perestroika” movement consistently point to the growing
preponderance of rational choice approaches to study politics which in their view are
becoming hegemonic within the discipline. While this movement has witnessed
some success, it is not clear if it will succeed in altering the increasingly quantitative
orientation of the discipline.48
In the recent past, Harold D. Lasswell (The Future of Political Science) has
trieed to explore important question of Political Science’s role in society and
different roles political scientists play.49 He viewed Political Science as a powerful
discipline educating a large number of students every year and shaping the public
policy debate at all levels of government. Lasswell’s examination of Political
Science poses two fundamental questions. One is epistemological: Should political
science adopt the empiricist approach that tries to discover cause effect relationship
in order to establish “laws” governing political behaviour or should it adopt the
interpretative position that aims to analyse the meaning of human action in a given
society? The other is normative: for what ends or purpose is knowledge of politics
sought.
In response to first question, Lasswell sides with empiricism. He argues for
increased use of surveys, statistics and quantitative techniques in political analysis.
His work creates an optimism inspired by the possibility of reforming society on the
basis of scientific truth. In response to the second question, Lasswell believes that
the purpose of the knowledge acquired by Political Science is to promote world
peace and defend “human dignity”. Further that political science properly practiced
could guide and shape society for the better. Guided by this humanistic standard,
political scientists should collect, categorize and analyse data on local, rational and
international political phenomenon to develop maxims that could be injected into
society’s complicated decision making process. Political Science “could be the
problem solving discipline that, with the help of modern technology, would engineer
a better society”, Lasswell concludes.

15
 Political Science --the Science of Politics-- has traveled down the ages from
Greek City States to the 21st century. During its journey of the last more than two
thousand years it has undergone different stages, changed its course and contours,
faced challenges to its legitimacy as a science, and was enriched by many other
disciplines. Its course at times was smooth and dormant and at times volatile, rugged
and zigzag. Its volume and space has continuously expanded with the contribution
from political philosophers, thinkers, and scientists. Being a science of all political
aspects of human and state behaviour, it has become an indispensable discipline for
every thinking being to study.

References:
1. Political science is the study of governments, public policies and political
processes, systems, and political behavior. (APAS) It is the analysis, description,
and prediction of political behavior, political systems and politics. Laswell, H.
Politics: Who Gets What, When, How, McGraw-Hill, London, 1935.
2. Pruthi, R.K (ed.): Nature and Scope of Political Science, Discovery Publishing
House, New Delhi, 2005.
3. Many Athenians considered their polis, their city state, to be perfect –ideal in
regards to military and cultural achievements. Plato, though, considered it to be
otherwise. Skeptical of a society that gives no specific place to those with expertise
in politics, Plato was well aware of the seediness of Athens; its arrogant nature,
military and political faux pas and even its contempt towards its own citizens on
some occasions. See, Jackson, R: Plato: a Beginner's Guide, Hoder & Stroughton,
London, 2001; Apel, Melanie Ann: Politics and Government in Ancient Greece,
Rosen Publishing Group, New York, 2004; Horsley, G. H. R: Hellenika: essays on
Greek politics and history, Macquarie Ancient History Association, 1982.
4. Mabbett, I. W, "The Date of the Arthaśāstra", Journal of the American Oriental
Society, vol. 84, no. 2, April 1964, pp. 162–169.
5. The two major pieces of epic literature in Western Civilization, Iliad and the
Odyssey, ascribed to Homer, deal with legendry events, the wars and victories

16
during the Trojan War waged by the Greeks against the city of Troy. Hesiod, a
Greek poet of 9th century BC instructively stressed on the importance of hard work
and righteousness. He traced the history of the world through various stages.
Thucydides, the Greek historian known for his History of Peloponnesian war,
brought to his understanding a practical acquaintance with both politics and military
sciences. He describes the military aspect of the war based on personal observations
and statements of other players in the war. He gave leading figures of war, lengthy
dramatic speeches which served as a medium for analyzing the public feelings and
the issues at stake. Another Greek historian and soldier, Xenophone was a, disciple
of Socrates in the 4th century BC. In his famous work Memorabilia (his
recollections of Socrates and Socratic conversation) he defended Socrates against
the charges of irreligion and that he had corrupted the young. Socrates (470 to 399
BC) who shaped the Western philosophy taught that every person has full
knowledge of ultimate truth contained within his soul and needs only to be spurred
to conscious reflection in order to become aware of it. His criticism of injustice in
Athenian society, which was spurring the youth towards awareness, and corrupting
their mind, had led to his prosecution and death sentence. Similarly, Euripides a
Greek dramatist of 5th century BC represented the new social, moral and political
movements taking place at that time. See, Griffin, Jasper, Boardman, John, Murray,
Oswyn: The Oxford history of Greece and the Hellenistic world, Oxford University
Press. Oxford, 2001; William Keith Chambers Guthrie: A History of Greek
Philosophy, Volume 1, The Earlier Presocratics and the Pythagoreans, Cambridge
University Press, 1962; Martin Litchfield West: Early Greek Philosophy and the
Orient, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1971.
6. For further elaboration, see, C. C. W. Taylor: From the Beginning to Plato:
Routledge History of Philosophy Volume 1, Routledge, London, 2003.
7. The politics, (III.1.1274b32-41). (IV.11.1295a 40-b1, VII.8.1328b1-2).
8. See, Ian Scott-Kilvert (Translation): The Rise of the Roman Empire, Penguin
Books, New York, 1979; Hammond, Mason: City-State and World State in Greek
and Roman Political Theory until Augustus, Biblo and Tannen, New York, 1966.

17
9. "Polybius attributed the growth of Roman power to its political institutions." See,
Almond, Gabriel Abraham: Ventures in political science, Lynne Rienner Publishers,
Boulder, 2002, p. 29; for further rteading on Polybius, see, Walbank, Frank w:
Polybius, Rome and the Hellenistic World: Essays and Reflections, Cambridge
University Press, 2002.
10. Badian, E. (ed): Roman Papers, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1979, pp. 400–
454; Dorey, T. A (ed.): Livy, Routledge & K. Paul, London, 1971.
11. For his views on politics, see, Cicero, Marcus Tullius, Cicero: letters to Atticus,
Vol, I, II, IV, VI, Cambridge University Press, 1965; Cicero, Marcus Tullius,
Selected Political Speeches, Penguin, London, 1969; also see, Kunkel, W: An
Introduction to Roman Legal and Constitutional History, The Clarendon Press,
Oxford, 1966 (translated into English by J.M. Kelly), p. 157
12. This reading finds support in John 18:36, where Jesus responds to Pontius Pilate
about the nature of his kingdom, "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom
were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be
delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world." See, John 18:36
(New International Version); Also see, Michael Grant, The Emperor Constantine,
Orion Books, London, 1998, p. 126-127; John, Julius Norwich: Byzantium: The
Early Centuries, Penguin Books, 1990, p. 34; Treadgold, Warren: A History of the
Byzantine State and Society, Stanford University Press, California, 1997, p. 25.
13. Portalié, E, “Teaching of St. Augustine of Hippo”, in, The Catholic
Encyclopedia, Robert Appleton Company, New York, 1907; Durant, Will: Caesar
and Christ: a History of Roman Civilization and of Christianity from Their
Beginnings to A.D. 325, MJF Books, New York, 1992.
14. Bishops were central to Middle Age society due to the literacy they possessed.
As a result, they often played a significant role in governance. However, beyond the
core areas of Western Europe, there remained many peoples with little or no contact
with Christianity or with classical Roman culture. See, “Middle Ages”, Microsoft
Encarta, 2007, Microsoft Corporation, 2006; Lawrence, C. H: Medieval
Monasticism: Forms of Religious Life in Western Europe in the Middle Ages (third
edition), Longman, London, 2001.

18
15. “High Middle Ages (967-1050), Expanding Power Base of the Catholic Church
in Europe”, see, Madeley, John T. S. and Zsolt Enyedi: Church and state in
contemporary Europe: the chimera of neutrality, Routledge, 2003. Available at,
http://www.worldology.com/Europe/high_middle_ages.htm
16. Munby, D L: The Idea of a Secular Society, Oxford University Press, London,
1963, pp. 14-32.
17. Qaradawi, Fiqh al, “Understanding Politics in Islam-Fiqh al Siyasah”, accessed
at, http://www.islamawareness.net/Politics/siyasah.html; John Esposito, “Islam:
Beyond the Green Menace”, Journal Current History, January 1994.
18. Muhammad Hamidullah, “The Political System of Islam”, in, John L. Esposito:
Introduction to Islam, Syracuse University Press, New York, 1998; also see,
Engineer, Asghar Ali, “The Concept Of Islamic State”, at,
http://static.panjabilok.net/faith/islam/islamstate.htm
19. Zakaria, Idris: The Political Aspects of Avicenna’s Theory of Cosmology and
the Human Soul, Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan, Bangi, 2002; al Naqib, Abd al-
Rahman, “Avicenna (370?-428AH---980?-1037AD), Prospects: the quarterly
review of comparative education, UNESCO, Paris, vol. XXIII, no. 1/2, 1993, pp. 53-
69.
20. Fakhry, Majid: Averroes: His Life, Works and Influence, One world
Publications, 2001; Nasr, Seyyed Hossein: and Oliver Leaman: History of Islamic
Philosophy, Routledge, London, 1996, p.314; Irwin, Jones, "Averroes' Reason: A
Medieval Tale of Christianity and Islam", The Philosopher, vol. LXXXX, no. 2,
Autumn 2002.
21. Ferguson, Wallace: The Renaisance, Harper & Row, New York, 1963. 1-29
22. Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince, p. 60; Rahe, Paul A (ed.) Machiavelli's Liberal
Republican Legacy, Cambridgr University Press, 2005, p. 231; John Langton and
Deitz, Mary G, "Machiavelli's Paradox: Trapping or Teaching the Prince" The
American Political Science Review, vol. 81, no. 4, December, 1987, pp. 1277-1288;
Thompson, C. Bradley, "John Adams's Machiavellian Moment," Review of Politics,
vol. 57, no. 3, 1995, pp. 389-417.

19
23. For Reformation movements in Europe, see, Simon, Edith: Great Ages of Man:
The Reformation, Time-Life Books, 1966, pp. 120-121; Spitz, Lewis W: The
Renaissance and Reformation Movements: Volume I, Concordia Publishing House,
St. Louis, 1987. For Counter Reformation movements, see, Dickens, A G: The
Counter Reformation, W. W. Norton & Company, New York, 1979; Evennett, H O:
The Spirit of the Counter Reformation, Cambridge University Press, 2008; Wright,
A D: Counter Reformation: Catholic Europe and the non-Christian world, Ashgate
Publishing Co. Derbyshire, 2005.
24. John Locke claims in his book, The Second Treatise of Government, that man
was endowed with reason and hence has the right to decide the form of government
that he should be under, while Jean Jacques Rousseau claimed that reason is what
has led man astray from the state of happiness and bliss that he led under nature.
Mayer, Nick, “Effects of the Protestant Reformation”, at,
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1738768/effects_of_the_protestant_refor
mation.html?cat=34; also see,
http://history2.professorpage.info/history2lectures.htm
25. Surel, Yves, “The role of cognitive and normative frames in policy-making”,
Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 7, issue 4, December 2000, pp. 495-512;
Gay, Peter: The Enlightenment: An Interpretation, W. W. Norton, New York, 1996.
26. The American Political Science Association, founded in 1903, is the leading
professional organization for the study of political science to promote high quality
teaching and education about politics and government. It aims to strengthen the
professional environment for political science and defend the legitimacy of scholarly
research into politics and government. Details about APSA can be seen at,
http://www.apsanet.org/content_4403.cfm.
27. Duvall, Tim, “The Discipline’s Community: The Effects of Method and Market
on Research Relevance”, paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Political Science Association, September 1998.
28. Taken from, “The Discipline Of Political Science”, accessed at,
http://science.jrank.org/pages/10774/Political-Science-Discipline-Political-
Science.html.

20
29. "On the basis of the philosophical approach, traditionalists prescribe normative
solutions to political problems. In their view, no political inquiry into social
problems can remain neutral or completely free of normative judgments or
prescriptions. Guy, James John: People, Politics and Government: A Canadian
Perspective, Pearson Education, Ontario, 2005, p. 57.
30. Bentley, Arthur F: The Process of Government: A Study of Social Pressures,
(2nd edition) Transaction Publishers, New Jersy, 1995.
31. Behavioralism became an approach in political science which seeks to provide
an objective, quantified approach to explaining and predicting political behavior. It
is associated with the rise of the behavioral sciences, modeled after the natural
sciences. Behavioralism seeks to examine the behaviour, actions, and acts of
individuals –rather than the characteristics of institutions such as legislatives,
executives, and judiciaries. Guy, James John, op. cit., p. 58; Petro, Nicolai: The
Rebirth of Russian Democracy: An Interpretation of Political Culture, Harvard
University Press, 1995, p. 6
32. Truman, David B: The Governmental Process: Political Interests and Public
Opinion, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1951.
33. Eulau, Heinz (ed.): Behavioralism in Political Science, Barnes & Noble, New
York, 1969, p.21.
34. Sarana, Rajiva Ranjan: Behaviouralism and Political Theory: Contributions of
David Easton and Lucian Pye, Rawat Publications, New Delhi, 2001.
35. Engeman, Thomas S, “Behavioralism, Postbehavioralism and the Reemergence
of Political Philosophy”, Perspectives on Political Science, vol. 24, issue 4, 1995, p.
214.
36. See, “The Discipline Of Political Science”, op. cit.,
37. James Farr, Seidelman, Raymond: Discipline and history: political science in the
United States, University of Michigan Press, 1993, pp. 230-33.
38. Baer, Michael A and Zeigler Harmon, “Computers and political science: A
review article”, Computers and the Humanities, vol. 1, no. 4, March 1967, p.135;
Janda, Kenneth, “Some computer applications in political science”, Computers and
the Humanities, vol. 2, no. 1, September 1967, pp. 12-16.

21
39. Katz, Barry, “The Acculturation of Thought: Transformations of the Refugee
Scholar in America”, The Journal of Modern History, vol. 63, no. 4, December
1991, pp. 740-752; also see, Abzug, Robert H: America Views the Holocaust, 1933-
1945: A Brief Documentary History St. Martin’s, Boston, 1999.
40. The new areas which came in its orbit include: These areas included: political
theory and philosophy, political concepts, political systems, ideology, game theory,
electronic voting systems, psephology (voting theory, electoral statistical analysis),
geopolitics and political geography, political economy, policy studies and public
policy analysis, comparative politics or cross-national political analysis, national
political systems (e.g. centralization, regionalism, federalism, core-periphery
studies, nation-state analysis etc.), international political systems (e.g. supra
nationalism, intergovernmental ism military alliances, hegemony studies),
globalization studies, political development, post- colonialism studies, institutional
theory, international relations, foreign policy analysis, peace studies, conflict
analysis, strategic studies, diplomacy studies, international law and politics, public
administration, local government studies, political party and coalition analysis,
political psychology, political sociology and socialization studies, micro political or
behavioural analysis, political history, interest groups/pressure groups, lobby politics
(especially environmental politics/political ecology), bureaucratic studies,
administrative and judicial behaviour, legislative processes and public law. It also
studies power in international relations and theory of great powers.
41. The courses that emerged and became popular during the Cold War period
include: The Cold War; Role of East European nations in US-Soviet detente; The
US and Cuba, Vietnam and China; Nuclear Weapons and Disarmament; Strategic
Arms Limitation Talks (SALT); Indian Ocean as a Peace Zone, etc. See,
Willoughby, Westel Woodbury and Fairlie, John Archibald, “The American political
science review, Volume 100”, American Journal of Political Science, 2006; Gaddis,
John Lewis: The Cold War: A New History, Penguin, 2005.
42. Gibbons, Michael T, “Political Science, Disciplinary History and Theoretical
Pluralism: A Response to Almond and Eckstein”, Political Science and Politics, vol.
23, no. 1, March, 1990, pp. 44-46.

22
43. deLeon, Peter, “The Policy Sciences Redux: New Road to Post-positivism,
Policy Studies Journal, vol. 22, no. 1, 1994, pp. 176-84; also see, Philips, D.C. &
Nicholas C. Burbules: Postpositivism and Educational Research, Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers, Boulder, 2000.
44. Crawford, James: The Creation of States in International Law, Oxford
University Press, 2005, pp 15-24; Raič, D: Statehood and the Law of Self-
determination, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2002, p 29.
45. Martin, Elizabeth A, “Declaratory Theory”, A Dictionary of Law, Oxford
University Press, 2002.
46. Berger, Suzanne, “Globalization and Politics”, Annual Review of Political
Science, vol. 3, June 2000, pp. 43-62.
47. “Implications Of Globalization”, available at,
http://science.jrank.org/pages/9546/General-Globalization-Implications-
Globalization.html.
48. Monroe, Kristen Renwick (ed.): Perestroika!: The Raucous Rebellion in Political
Science, Yale University Press, New Haven 2005; Schram, Sanford F and Brian,
Caterino, (eds.): Making Political Science Matter: Debating Knowledge, Research,
and Method, New York University Press, 2006.
49. Lasswell, Harold D: The Future of Political Science, Transaction Publishers,
New Jersey, 2005; also see, Farr James, Jacob s. Hacker, Nicole Kazee, “The Policy
Scientist of Democracy: The Discipline of Harold D. Lasswell”, American Political
science Review, vol.100, no.4, November, 2006, pp. 579-587.

23