Traditional and modern views of political science and difference between two

Ans. The nature, subject matter, goals, method of study and conceptual subject area of modern political
science are different from traditional political science. First of all, we will describe the characteristics of
both traditional and modern political science here. All the scholars of the classical era like Plato,
Hobbes, Rousseau, Green etc. come in this order. Its characteristics can be briefly mentioned as follows.
, (i) Founder's Approach- It studies the state and its structures, units etc. from the founder's point of
view. The main subjects of his investigation have been the state, government, political institutions,
goals of the state (justice, security, liberty, equality, morality etc.). (ii) The influence of the thinker's
personality and attitude - It has been a characteristic of traditional political science that its theories have
been influenced by the personality and point of view of its exponent, who tries to find a permanent
solution to the political problems of the time. Most of the thinkers have been influenced by ethics or
philosophy. They have paid attention to the goals and values of human life and society. Achievement of
moral life by Greek thinkersThe idea of God, the Christian politicians of the Middle Ages, and the idea of
meeting the conscience of the idealists are proof of this. His ideologies have been considered
transcendentalist. His views are subjective and method of thinking is deductive. They do not follow the
scientific method. The basis of his ideas are personal perspective and thinking, imagination and
spiritualism. (3) A feature of the super-disciplinary traditional political science is that the field of
thinking of its thinkers was super-disciplinary; That is, his thoughts were related to many social sciences,
not only with politics. Therefore, thinkers like Plato, Aristotle, Rousseau, Marx etc. have taken an
important place in almost all social sciences. As a result, there remained a lot of ambiguity in the subject
area of Political Science. (iv) Intellectual traditional political theory is often intellectual and based on
fact and practice. (v) The conclusions of conservatives are based on logic, not mathematical results like
data collection and surveys like in modern political science. on scientific methods. (vi) Legal outlook or
some empiricist thinkers are also seen among the traditionalists, but their empiricism or realism has
been shaped, legal and institutional in relation to political institutions. From this point of view, they
have been able to see politics from juristic or legal aspects. (vii) Methods The main methods of research
and analysis of traditionalists have been historical and descriptive. Much of its literature has been taken
in libraries rather than in the open market of politics. (v) Lack of homogeneity Unlike modern political
scientists, traditional thinkers do not try to find general political theory. Since their thoughts are
subjective and emotional, there is no homogeneity in their thoughts. (ix) Not inter-disciplinary, the
traditionalists do not have the inclination to adopt the techniques and conclusions of study of other
disciplines and disciplines, especially in the developed social sciences. Therefore, traditional political
science has not become an inter-disciplinary one. Features of the Modern Political Science Modern
Political Science, also known as New Political Science, emerged mainly after the Second World War with
the Behavioral Revolution. Before telling its difference from traditional political science, we will tell its
features. Following are the main features of modern political science. (i) Behaviorist - Traditional
political science was institutionalist while modern political science is practical. It studies all the political
behavior of human beings apart from the structure of government and its institutions.(ii) Scientism
Modern political scientists want to make their subject scientific and precise. They examine and analyze
political events and facts tightly on the basis of scientificity. For this, they take new techniques of study
from natural sciences and other social sciences and use them in political science. (iii) Prediction -
Modern political scientists are trying to make their subject capable of making as much prediction as
possible. This is being done with a view to make the subject useful and relevant. (iv) The aim of theory
building The aim of modern political science is to develop the theoretical communication of politics. On
the basis of this they discover and analyze political events and facts. Through this analysis, they make
generalizations and on the basis of generalizations, finally make theories. In short, the ultimate goal of
modern political science is theory building. (v) Valueless Modern Political Science is said to be almost
value free. Since its emphasis is on a scientific and precise subject, therefore in political analysis it
makes the subject of its study human values such as morality, liberty, etc., which are observed or can be
observed (observable). (vi) Verification Modern political scientists do not blindly accept the theoretical
things of politics, they emphasize on their more accurate analysis and verification by factual evidence.
In short, they are ready to accept only those political theories and conclusions which can be properly
verified. (vii) Objectivity Objectivity is the biggest test of modern political science. Today's political
scientists want to give the form of reality by removing their subject from imagination and thinking. They
emphasize the use of a variety of techniques used in the natural and social sciences to achieve
objectivity. (viii) Inter-disciplinary Modern Political Science is inter-disciplinary. It looks at human life
and activities as a whole, the political life of which is one aspect only political life and behavior is
influenced by other aspects of human life, actions and practices. As a result, modern political scientists
establish close links with other social disciplines and use their subjects, methods of study and techniques
to a great extent. Difference between Traditional and Modern Political Science Traditional and modern
political science are different from each other with respect to nature, subject matter, goals and
conceptual scope. Here we will discuss the differences between them. (i) From the point of view of
subject matter, under the traditional approach, Political Science used to give prime place to values and
goals. His subjects were the origin of state and government, development organization, types, political
parties, political ideologies, study of major governments and constitutions, international relations, public
administration etc. In a short time, the focus of traditional political science was the 'state'.Modern
political science studies 'politics without state'. According to this, the manifold influence and spread of
politics remains outside the state and its institutions. Politics resides in stateless societies and
organizations, and in formal and informal organizations other than the state, which should be studied.
Thus, modern political scientists want to liberate their subject from the limited perspective of the state
and political institutions. (ii) From the point of view of the broadness of the field, according to the
modern thinker, the field of politics has become very broad. To make it scientific, conservative subjects
such as the goal of the state, best government, study of formal institutions, historical method etc. have
been removed from it. Instead of values, state and its institutions, other subjects are being studied
under political science. Under the new political theory, units like power, control and influence, elite,
decision process and action are studied. Political concepts like liberty, equality, democracy are
interpreted in a new way. Modern political science now studies new concepts, such as political
socialization, political culture, political development, communication etc. (a) From the point of view of
the meaning of political, from the traditional point of view the subject and problem related to the state
and its structures are considered as the subject of 'politics' or political science. On the contrary,
according to modern political science, the nature of politics is specific and political facts, events,
processes, representatives are related to power, governance or authority in some form or the other.
New political science studies the behavior related to these, which is called 'political behaviour'. (iv)
From the point of view of the objective of political analysis, the aim of modern politics is not to achieve a
better life, but to understand and describe political events realistically. Beyond this their purpose is to
prophesy. Its basic objective is 'theory building'. The traditional thinkers used to construct the theory
about the ideal state by imagination while the modern politicalists explain the political phenomena by
scientific methods and techniques. (v) The main difference between the modern approach and the
traditional approach from the point of view of the method of study is about their method of study. The
principal methods of study in traditional political science were philosophical, historical and descriptive.
The sources of research were thought, imagination and library. There was a complete lack of scientific
methods and techniques. In contrast, empiricist methods of investigation are used in modern politics.
Behaviorist political analysis emphasizes scientific methods, pure conclusions, cumulative research and
broad generalizations. He uses a variety of methods and techniques, such as interview, content analysis,
experimentation, etc. Generalization is discovered by similar type of investigation and by establishing a
relationship between them, 'theory' is developed. (vi) From the point of view of the search for general
theory, the goal of modern politics is not to discover only sporadic theories, but also general principles
(general or overarhingtheory) to build. For example, rules can be found out by studying about voting
and on the basis of them a model is prepared regarding voting behavior. In traditional politics ideals are
conceived, not general principles are created. Since the methods of study are historical and
philosophical, it is not even possible to find a common theory on a scientific basis. (vii) From the point
of view of conceptual subject-periphery, in addition to concepts and paradigms in behaviorist politics,
there is a mention of conceptual frame of reference. Easton has pointed out the importance of theory
in this context in the form of a conceptual framework, which is useful in the form of a sieve for the
selection or rejection of observed facts. Such conceptual subject-periphery has not been conceived in
traditional politics. The old-fashioned thinkers discuss theories or esoterics directly, without paying
attention to the analysis or selection of facts to arrive at them. (viii) From an inter-disciplinary point of
view, a remarkable feature of modern political science is its inter-disciplinary nature. From this point of
view, psychology, economics, statistics, micro sociology, social ethnography have had a great impact on
political science. The old political thinkers, keeping their subject independent, did not take anything
from other subjects, but their ideas were so mixed with other subjects that a separate existence of
political science could not emerge. In some cases, traditional politics was not interdisciplinary. S ( ix )
One of the main features of modern political science is its value neutrality from the point of view of
values. Moral values were the basis of the subject of traditional political science, whereas values are not
given any place in it to give the status of hard science to new political science. Modern political
scientists are now trying to make political science relevant and useful by giving proper place to values.
From the above discussion it is clear that there is some fundamental difference between traditional
political science and modern political science. However, this does not mean that they are separated
from each other or that one has been replaced by the other. In fact, these two approaches complement
each other and both have an interdependent relationship. In fact, by combining both, an integral view
of Political Science can be presented. The researches and discoveries of modern political science can be
refined and clarified on the basis of the literature of traditional politics. In fact, when there is a change
in the field of study or technique of any old subject, then it does not completely break away from the
achievements of the past, but establishes itself on the achievements of the past. The same can be said
of the new political science. Without understanding and applying the principles and subjects of
traditional political science, modern political science will become frivolous and fruitless. The unity of
traditional and modern political science has been discussed by Robert Doll in these words, "There is a
whole basis for thinking that unity (traditional and modern political science) in ) can be re-established