POLITICAL SCIENCE

Anyone who says they are not interested in politics is like a

drowning man who insists he is not interested in water.
Unknown

Political science, in its modern sense, is the study of the relationship between political
actors, institutions and political outcomes. In other terms, it is the study of the affairs of the
state.
The word “politics” roots from politika, which means “affairs of the city.” It is annexed
with “science” because it borrows the scientific method in testing theoretical explanations
regarding politics.

‘EMPIRICAL REGULARITIES’

Political scientists try to understand and explain politics through these empirical regularities:

Political Behavior refers to the beliefs and actions of political actors, e.g. citizens,
voters, party leaders, or members of interest groups, brought about by their political
preferences: political interests, values, and goals.
A political institution is the arena for these political behavior.
Political outcome is the product of the consortium of the two. It covers a broad range of
issues, from policy outcomes, such as economic growth, to broader political phenomena, such
as social and ethnic harmony.

THEORETICAL EXPLANATIONS

A theoretical explanation in political science is a set of assumptions about how political

actors behave and how political institutions influence and shape this behavior, from which a set
of propositions is derived, which can then be tested against empirical observations. Two of the
most prominent are:

1. Rational choice approach

It assumes that political actors behave ‘rationally,’ meaning that the actors have a set of
preferences over policy or political outcomes, and when faced with a political choice they will
tend to choose the option which they prefer (which yields them the highest ‘utility’).

Prisoner’s Dilemma
Two people are arrested who are suspected of committing a crime and are interrogated
separately. They are each told that they can either keep quiet or talk. Three scenarios may
arise:
 If they both keep quiet, the police tell them that they have sufficient evidence to convict
them both for a minor offence, which has a six-month jail term.
 If one talks and the other stays quiet, the talker will be let off, and the other will be
convicted of a major offence, for a five-year term.
 If they both talk, then they will both be convicted of the major offence, but with a shorter
jail term, of one year.
 Best collective outcome: D
Rational approach’s outcome: A

Explanation: Rational approach’s outcome

has reached Nash equilibrium, a situation in
a game when a player is better off with his
decisions regardless of what the opponent
does. If Suspect 1 talks and Suspect 2
remains quiet, then Suspect 1 will be let off,
and if Suspect 1 talks and Suspect 2 talks,
then at least Suspect 1 will not end up with a
long jail term.

Credits: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/
Main/PrisonersDilemma

One key insight of rational choice theory then is that rational political behavior can
sometimes lead to political outcomes which are NOT collectively desirable. This theory can
apply to global environment emissions and may explain why parties in two-party systems tend
to converge on the average (median) voter, etc.

2. Institutional Approach
Institutions means any rule which can constrain the behavior of political actors, dictating
political action and outcome rather than the political preferences of the actors. It could be:
 Formal institutions include provisions in a constitution, the rules of procedure in a
parliament, an electoral system, campaign finance regulations, etc.
 Informal institutions encompass social structures, social norms and cultural practices,
metaphysical beliefs and ideological values, etc.

Ultimatum Game
Player 1 makes a proposal of how to divide a Dollar between the two players, and Player 2 then
decides whether to accept or reject the proposal. Two scenarios may arise:
 Player 2 accepts the proposal; the money is divided between the two players as
proposed by Player 1.
 Player 2 rejects the proposal, neither player receives any money.

Rational approach’s outcome: Player 1 should propose a 99-1 division, and Player 2 should
accept this proposal because 1 cent is greater than 0.

Actual outcomes in research:

Average for university students in North America and Europe:
 Player 1 proposes 60-40 or 55-45, and Player 2 accepts it.
 Player 1 proposes anything <40 for Player 2, and Player 2 rejects it.
Some societies from a research study by psychologists and economists:
 Player 1 proposes 42-58, Player 2 accepts it. (Lamera, Indonesia)
 Player 1 proposes 74-26, Player 2 accepts it. (Machiguenga, Peru)

Explanation: Rather than behaving in a rational utility-maximizing way, political actors tend to
follow a ‘logic of appropriateness’ that fits their social, cultural or political context (March and
Olsen, 1989).
 An institution’s influence on a political outcome also tends to be ‘locked-in’ for a long
term. This is known as ‘path dependency’ (Pierson, 2000). A prominent example is the structure
of party systems in western Europe today.

3. Two-way approach
Most contemporary political scientists combine ideas from both approaches, and as a
result assume a two-way interaction between actors and institutions.

Actors can ‘choose’ institutions, e.g.:

Formal: When a new democracy is formed, citizens and parties play a role in deciding
what should be written in a constitution.
Informal: Repeated interactions between actors shape how cultural norms evolve and
develop.
Once institutions have been set up, they constrain actors in making decisions and thus influence
political outcome; these institutions tend to be difficult to change.

LEVIATHAN: PEACE THROUGH POLITICS

Thomas Hobbes argues in Leviathan that civil peace and social unity can only be
achieved by establishing a commonwealth (or in other terms, a state) through social contract.
Hobbes employs the Leviathan, a monstrous sea creature appearing in the Bible, as a metaphor
for his ideal government, wherein a sovereign power forms the head of a gigantic human body
that is built out of the bodies of its citizens. The literature has four books:

I. Of Man
This book contains the philosophical framework for the entire text. Hobbes begins by
arguing that every aspect of human nature can be deduced from materialistic
principles and depicts that the state of nature of man is inherently violent and awash
with fear. He then argues that human beings naturally seek peace because of the
dread of his state of nature, and the best way to achieve it is through the Leviathan.

II. Of Common-wealth
This book details the process of erecting the Leviathan, outlines the rights of
sovereigns and its citizens, and imagines the legislative and civil mechanics of the
commonwealth.

III. Of a Christian Common-wealth

This book concerns the compatibility of Christian doctrine with Hobbesian
philosophy and the religious system of the Leviathan.
 IV. Of the Kingdome of Darknesse
This book engages in debunking false religious beliefs and arguing that the political
implementation of the Leviathanic state is necessary to achieve a secure Christian
commonwealth.

Hobbes's philosophical method in Leviathan is modeled after geometric proof; he

observed how conclusions derived by geometry are indisputable because each of constituent
steps is indisputable in itself.

WHY STUDY POLITICAL SCIENCE?

People lives are continually affected by the behavior of political actors and the outcomes
they consequently make. By studying political science, we ought not only to know more about
the mechanism of politics but also to understand how our own actions can contribute to political
phenomena, may it be unconsciously or consciously, and how we can modify it towards our
political preferences.

REFERENCES:
 Hix, Simon and Matthew Whiting. 2012. Introduction to Political Science. Retrieved from
http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/sites/default/files/programme_resources/lse/lse_pdf
/subject_guides/ps1172_ch1-4.pdf
 SparkNotes Editors. (n.d.). SparkNote on Leviathan. Retrieved July 8, 2017, from
http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/leviathan/.
 Pierson, P. ‘Path Dependence, Increasing Returns, and the Study of Politics’, American
Political Science Review 94(2) 2000, pp.251–267.
 March, J.G. and J.P. Olsen Rediscovering Institutions. (New York, NY: Free Press,
1989) [ISBN 9780029201152].
 Saylor Academy. (2016 December 14). Saylor Academy’s “Introduction to Political
Science”. Retrieved July 8, 2017, from
https://learn.saylor.org/mod/page/view.php?id=10917