PART 1 COMPARATIVE POLITICS:       A BACKGROUNDER <ul><li>A.  Objectivity in Social Science and Philosophy (Max Weber ) </...
<ul><li>An objective analysis of cultural events  which proceeds according to the thesis that the ideal of science is the ...
B.  The Value-oriented Bias of Social Inquiry (Ernest Nagel) <ul><li>The Selection of Problems </li></ul><ul><li>Similar t...
<ul><li>The determination of the contents of the conclusions . </li></ul><ul><li>According to Nagel, one measure to identi...
<ul><li>The identification of the Fact </li></ul><ul><li>Nagel admitted as correct three claims: </li></ul><ul><li>A large...
<ul><li>Value Judgment </li></ul><ul><li>1.  Characterizing Value judgment .  Judgment that uses a standard.  Ex.  A speci...
<ul><li>The assessment of Evidence </li></ul><ul><li>The Three Variants of the claim that value-commitments enter into the...
<ul><li>For Nagel, this argument will not hold water.  The decision for example of a physicist between 2 statistical hypot...
<ul><li>A social scientist after discovering what his social perspective is, can formulate his conclusions relationally so...
C .  Neutrality in Political Science (Charles Taylor) <ul><li>The aim of Taylor’s discussion is to call into question the ...
<ul><li>One can look at this phenomenon in terms of: </li></ul><ul><li>The struggle between the legislative and executive ...
<ul><li>Enthymeme: </li></ul><ul><li>X will make a man happy (major premise) </li></ul><ul><li>To  X is good  </li></ul><u...
CONCEPTS  WE WILL OFTEN ENCOUNTER IN THIS COURSE <ul><li>POLITICAL SCIENCE :  The systematic study of politics. It is the ...
<ul><li>Why do we need to do comparative politics? </li></ul><ul><li>Intellectual Curiosity </li></ul><ul><li>To better un...
<ul><li>OBJECTIVES OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS </li></ul><ul><li>Contextual Description </li></ul><ul><li>Description of the p...
<ul><li>Example:  The comparison of historical experiences of the advanced industrial countries with those of the Third Wo...
<ul><li>FACTORS IN CHOOSING THE METHODS OFCOMPARISON </li></ul><ul><li>Research Question </li></ul><ul><li>Example 1: Why ...
<ul><li>The Epistemological position of a researcher </li></ul><ul><li>Those adhering to deductive theory may choose metho...
<ul><li>Advantages: </li></ul><ul><li>The use of statistical control to rule out rival explanations </li></ul><ul><li>Exte...
<ul><li>Disadvantages: </li></ul><ul><li>The question of the availability of data.  It is easier now though because of the...
<ul><li>This method is referred to as “case-oriented” since a country is often the unit of analysis and the concentration ...
<ul><li>Single Country Studies as comparison </li></ul><ul><li>It is considered comparative if the study uses concepts app...
<ul><li>PUBLIUS:  The group pen name of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay who wrote the Federalist papers reg...
<ul><li>Max Weber : The most important single figure in the field of Comparative Politics in the 20 th  Century. </li></ul...
<ul><li>According to him, while landed aristocracy in England and most of western europe was forced to give up their domin...
<ul><li>For him, the Republic is the only system compatible with a culture of rationality and science because a Republic i...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Compgov part 1

269
-1

Published on

Published in: Technology, Economy & Finance
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
269
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Compgov part 1

  1. 1. PART 1 COMPARATIVE POLITICS: A BACKGROUNDER <ul><li>A. Objectivity in Social Science and Philosophy (Max Weber ) </li></ul><ul><li>Reality is affected by an infinitude of events happening both within and outside ourselves. Since we only have a finite human mind, we only focus our attention on events that are of importance to us. </li></ul><ul><li>The aims of empirical science of concrete reality is to find and understand: </li></ul><ul><li>The cultural significance of events and </li></ul><ul><li>The causes (Why is it like that and not otherwise) </li></ul><ul><li>The larger the scope of a term, the more it leads us away from the richness of reality because in order to include the largest possible number of phenomena, it must be as abstract as possible and hence devoid of content. </li></ul>
  2. 2. <ul><li>An objective analysis of cultural events which proceeds according to the thesis that the ideal of science is the reduction of empirical reality to laws is therefore meaningless due to 2 things: </li></ul><ul><li>1. Knowledge of social laws is not knowledge of social reality but is just an aid in attaining the latter; and </li></ul><ul><li>2. Knowledge of cultural events is inconceivable except on the basis of the significance which the concrete cluster of reality have for us in certain individual concrete situations. </li></ul><ul><li>CONCLUSION: </li></ul><ul><li>Cultural Science involves “subjective” presuppositions in so far as it concerns itself only with those components of reality which have some relationships to events to which we attach cultural significance. Consequently, the choice of an object of investigation and the extent and depth of the attempt to understand a cultural phenomenon is determined by an investigator’s evaluative ideas which by the way are subjective. </li></ul><ul><li>There is therefore no “absolutely” objective scientific analysis of social phenomena. </li></ul>
  3. 3. B. The Value-oriented Bias of Social Inquiry (Ernest Nagel) <ul><li>The Selection of Problems </li></ul><ul><li>Similar to Weber, Nagel believed that the things a social scientist selects for study may indeed be dependent on the fact that he is a cultural being. However, there is no difference between the sciences (natural or social) with respect to the fact that the interests of scientists determine what they select for investigation. </li></ul><ul><li>According to Nagel, the selection of a problem represents no obstacle to the pursuit of objectivity controlled inquiry in any branch of study. </li></ul>
  4. 4. <ul><li>The determination of the contents of the conclusions . </li></ul><ul><li>According to Nagel, one measure to identify a value-bias when it occurs and to minimize it so as to eliminate completely its upsetting effects is by abandoning the pretense that social scientists are value-neutral and instead they should state their value assumptions explicitly. </li></ul><ul><li>The above suggestion will help the self-corrective mechanisms of social science as a social enterprise since modern science: </li></ul><ul><li>Encourages mutual exchange and free but responsible criticisms of ideas; </li></ul><ul><li>Welcomes competition between independent investigators even if they have different intellectual orientations; and </li></ul><ul><li>Retains only those proposed conclusions that survive critical examinations by an indefinitely large community of students and scholars. </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>The identification of the Fact </li></ul><ul><li>Nagel admitted as correct three claims: </li></ul><ul><li>A large number of characterization sometimes assumed to be purely factual descriptions do indeed formulate a type of value judgment; </li></ul><ul><li>It is often difficult and inconvenient to distinguish purely factual from evaluative contents of many terms employed in the social sciences; and </li></ul><ul><li>Values are commonly attached to means and not only ends. </li></ul><ul><li>However, according to Nagel, these do not entail the conclusion that there is no possibility of distinguishing the factual from the evaluative contents. </li></ul>
  6. 6. <ul><li>Value Judgment </li></ul><ul><li>1. Characterizing Value judgment . Judgment that uses a standard. Ex. A specimen is anemic </li></ul><ul><li>Appraising value judgment . Judgment that concludes that a state of affairs is worthy of approval or disapproval. Ex. It is undesirable for an animal to remain anemic. </li></ul><ul><li>According to Nagel, although characterizing judgments are necessarily required by many appraising judgments, making appraising judgment is not a necessary condition for making characterizing ones. </li></ul><ul><li>It is difficult but this difficulty provides no compelling reason for the claim that an ethically neutral social science is inherently impossible. </li></ul>
  7. 7. <ul><li>The assessment of Evidence </li></ul><ul><li>The Three Variants of the claim that value-commitments enter into the assessment of evidence: </li></ul><ul><li>Social scientists’ works are products of their socio-economic status and are therefore affected by the social values associated with their social positions. </li></ul><ul><li>However, according to Nagel, there is a possibility of recognizing assessments of evidence that are prejudiced by value-commitments and the possibility of correcting such prejudice. </li></ul><ul><li>The assessment of evidence for so-called statistical hypotheses. </li></ul>
  8. 8. <ul><li>For Nagel, this argument will not hold water. The decision for example of a physicist between 2 statistical hypotheses concerning the probability of a certain energy exchanges in atoms is similar to the situation of a social scientist who have to choose between 2 statistical hypotheses concerning the relative frequency of childless marriages under certain social arrangements </li></ul><ul><li>The claim that the influence of special values to which a social scientist is committed because of his own social involvements is not eliminable. </li></ul><ul><li>According to Nagel, though absolute objective knowledge of human affairs is unattainable, a relational form of objectivity called relationism , can nevertheless be achieved. </li></ul>
  9. 9. <ul><li>A social scientist after discovering what his social perspective is, can formulate his conclusions relationally so as to indicate that his findings conform to the criteria of validity implicit in his perspective. His conclusions will thus have relational objectivity. </li></ul><ul><li>CONCLUSION : </li></ul><ul><li>The reasons advanced for the so-called inherent possibility of securing objective conclusions in social sciences do not establish what they claim to establish, they only direct attention to practical difficulties frequently encountered in social sciences. </li></ul>
  10. 10. C . Neutrality in Political Science (Charles Taylor) <ul><li>The aim of Taylor’s discussion is to call into question the relation of factual findings in politics and value position. </li></ul><ul><li>The thesis that political science is value-neutral has maximum plausibility when we look at some of its detailed findings. </li></ul><ul><li>Example: MCCARTHYISM – the political practice of publicizing accusations of disloyalty or subversion with insufficient regard to evidence. </li></ul><ul><li>In explaining the rise of McCarthyism in the 1940s, there is an indefinite number of features which can figure in a correlation. One will therefore examine the phenomenon depending on the theoretical framework one is pushing. </li></ul>
  11. 11. <ul><li>One can look at this phenomenon in terms of: </li></ul><ul><li>The struggle between the legislative and executive branches of government (institutional structure) </li></ul><ul><li>The development of a certain personality structure among certain sections of the population (character structure) </li></ul><ul><li>The emergence of a new status group in American society. </li></ul><ul><li>The current position of the US in the world today; etc. </li></ul><ul><li>A given framework therefore affirms some dimensions and denies others. </li></ul><ul><li>A framework secrete a certain value position. This is so as a given dimension of variation will usually determine for itself how we are to judge what is good and bad. </li></ul>
  12. 12. <ul><li>Enthymeme: </li></ul><ul><li>X will make a man happy (major premise) </li></ul><ul><li>To X is good </li></ul><ul><li>Therefore what makes a man happy is good. </li></ul><ul><li>Judging X as good depends on what values the man who judges hold. </li></ul><ul><li>According to Taylor, the non-neutrality of the theoretical findings of political science need not worry us. </li></ul><ul><li>Nonetheless, there is nothing to stop us making the greatest attempts to avoid biases and achieve objectivity. </li></ul>
  13. 13. CONCEPTS WE WILL OFTEN ENCOUNTER IN THIS COURSE <ul><li>POLITICAL SCIENCE : The systematic study of politics. It is the study of principles and conduct of political institutions. </li></ul><ul><li>POLITICS : The study of “who gets what, when and how.” It is about the process by which people govern and are being governed. </li></ul><ul><li>COMPARATIVE POLITICS : A sub-field of political science. It focuses on the methodology. When applied to a particular field of study, comparative politics maybe referred to in different names like Comparative government or Comparative foreign policies. </li></ul><ul><li>LEGITIMACY: Refers to the attitude of the people that the government’s actions are right and therefore deserve to be obeyed. (Government) </li></ul><ul><li>SOVEREIGNTY : The power to make laws and control a territory and the people in it. (Country/State) </li></ul><ul><li>AUTHORITY : The ability of a ruler to win people’s obedience. (Leader) </li></ul><ul><li>NATION : Refers to a population that exhibit homogeneity in terms of behavior, attitude and ideas and often but not always common language. </li></ul><ul><li>STATE : Commonly interchanged with the term country. It is composed of a population, living in a given territory, ruled by a government that exhibits and protects sovereignty and is recognized by other States. </li></ul><ul><li>GOVERNMENT : The people and institutions that make and enforce rules or laws for the community or State as a whole. </li></ul>
  14. 14. <ul><li>Why do we need to do comparative politics? </li></ul><ul><li>Intellectual Curiosity </li></ul><ul><li>To better understand our own political system, process etc. </li></ul><ul><li>To learn from the experiences of other countries </li></ul><ul><li>2 Steps of an effective comparative analysis </li></ul><ul><li>The understanding and appreciation of the functions of individual systems or parts of those systems. </li></ul><ul><li>From this working knowledge we can ask questions on how democratic or authoritarian a system is, the level of its political development, the degree of political stability, the effectiveness of the decision-making process, the influence of political ideologies to public policies and so on. </li></ul><ul><li>2. The formulation of generalizations </li></ul><ul><li>This is difficult because of the multiplicity of factors as well as the unpredictable effects of chance to the political process. </li></ul>
  15. 15. <ul><li>OBJECTIVES OF COMPARATIVE POLITICS </li></ul><ul><li>Contextual Description </li></ul><ul><li>Description of the political phenomena or events of a specific State or groups of States </li></ul><ul><li>Important in the sense that a good and systematic research starts with a good description of the subject being studied. </li></ul><ul><li>2. Conceptual Classification </li></ul><ul><li>The political systems, events etc. of countries are grouped into categories along similar characteristics. </li></ul><ul><li>a. Dichotomy . Ex. Democratic as opposed to authoritarian </li></ul><ul><li>b. Typology of regimes and governmental systems. </li></ul><ul><li>Ex. Aristotle’s Classification of Rules </li></ul><ul><li>3. Hypothesis-Testing </li></ul><ul><li>Research seeks to explain what was described and classified </li></ul><ul><li>Comparison of countries allows rival explanations to be ruled out and hypotheses derived from some theoretical framework tested. </li></ul>
  16. 16. <ul><li>Example: The comparison of historical experiences of the advanced industrial countries with those of the Third World to uncover the relationship of capitalist development and democracy. </li></ul><ul><li>4 . Prediction </li></ul><ul><li>The most difficult objective </li></ul><ul><li>Predictions of Comparative Politics tend to be along the line of probabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Example 1: In democratic nations, an incumbent political office holder in any given election has a higher probability of winning the election than the non-incumbent. </li></ul><ul><li>Example 2:The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the New World Order by Huntington. Huntington predicted the clash of western and Islamic civilizations which became more relevant after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the WTC and Pentagon. </li></ul>
  17. 17. <ul><li>FACTORS IN CHOOSING THE METHODS OFCOMPARISON </li></ul><ul><li>Research Question </li></ul><ul><li>Example 1: Why did Tony Blair and his Labor Party win the UK’s 1997 general election after 18 years of the Conservative Party’s rule? </li></ul><ul><li>(The Method obviously is to focus on UK alone) </li></ul><ul><li>Example 2: Why do reformed Left-of-Center political parties in Europe experience electoral successes? </li></ul><ul><li>(The method is to study all the European countries) </li></ul><ul><li>2. Time and resources of researchers </li></ul><ul><li>This limits the number of countries that can feasibly be studied. </li></ul><ul><li>3. The researcher’s comfort. </li></ul><ul><li>Some researchers may be comfortable in using quantitative approach, others may enjoy doing fine detailing of countries’ political events etc. </li></ul>
  18. 18. <ul><li>The Epistemological position of a researcher </li></ul><ul><li>Those adhering to deductive theory may choose methods different from those subscribing to inductive theory. Similarly, those seeking universal generalizations may use methods different from those who try to explain events contextually. </li></ul><ul><li>The comparative methods depend on the trade-off between the level of abstraction and the scope of countries under study. </li></ul><ul><li>In general, the higher the level of abstraction, the potential to include a large number of nations for study is higher. </li></ul><ul><li>METHODS OF COMPARISON </li></ul><ul><li>Comparing many Countries </li></ul><ul><li>This is particularly suited to quantitative approach (use of statistics for instance) although there are some that used qualitative approach like in Huntington’s “the Clash of Civilizations” (1996) and Finer’s “The History of Government” (1997) </li></ul>
  19. 19. <ul><li>Advantages: </li></ul><ul><li>The use of statistical control to rule out rival explanations </li></ul><ul><li>Extensive coverage of countries </li></ul><ul><li>The ability to make strong inferences </li></ul><ul><li>Identification of deviant county or countries </li></ul><ul><li>Example: In testing the relationship of a dependent variable with the independent variable, one can identify the deviant countries that do not fit the researcher’s theory for instance like the positive relationship become income inequality and political violence (Miller and Selingson, 1987). A researcher then should look for other explanations to this deviation. </li></ul><ul><li>Quantitative studies is useful in building theories because they can easily be replicated by other researchers </li></ul><ul><li>Qualitative approach is harder because of (1) it requires richer and deeper level of information like histories which are more difficult to synthesize and (2) it cannot be subjected to statistical analysis. </li></ul>
  20. 20. <ul><li>Disadvantages: </li></ul><ul><li>The question of the availability of data. It is easier now though because of the internet. </li></ul><ul><li>The validity of measures . This problem is due to a researcher’s definition of a concept. </li></ul><ul><li>Example: the concept of democracy can be seen in different ways: </li></ul><ul><li>The vote-share of the smallest party with the level of electoral turn-out. </li></ul><ul><li>The competitiveness of the nomination process. </li></ul><ul><li>The Executive-legislative effectiveness </li></ul><ul><li>Mathematical Skills . This is mitigated by the availability of computer programs that can aid the researchers in their analysis (Algebra, Probabilities, Calculus) </li></ul><ul><li>2. Comparing Few Countries </li></ul><ul><li>More intensive and less extensive </li></ul>
  21. 21. <ul><li>This method is referred to as “case-oriented” since a country is often the unit of analysis and the concentration is on the similarities and differences among the countries rather than the relationships of variables. </li></ul><ul><li>Types of System Design </li></ul><ul><li>“ Most Similar System Design.” It seeks to compare political systems that share a host of similar features in an effort to neutralize differences while highlighting others. It seeks therefore to identify differences among similar countries. </li></ul><ul><li>“ Most Different System Design.” It compares countries that share no common features apart of the political outcome to be explained. </li></ul><ul><li>Some researchers use both designs. </li></ul><ul><li>Example: Studying the capitalist development and democracy in Latin America (MSSD) and comparing Latin America with the advanced industrial world (MDSD) </li></ul>
  22. 22. <ul><li>Single Country Studies as comparison </li></ul><ul><li>It is considered comparative if the study uses concepts applicable to other countries, develop concepts applicable to other countries and/or seeks to make larger inferences. </li></ul><ul><li>It provides contextual descriptions, develops new classifications, generate hypothesis, confirm or infirm theories and explain the presence of deviant countries identified through cross-national comparisons. </li></ul><ul><li>Selected Major Contributors to the Development of comparative politics </li></ul><ul><li>Aristotle: With his Classification of right and perverted forms of Constitutions is considered by many as the father of Comparative politics. </li></ul><ul><li>John Stuart Mill: pioneered the use of comparative method in understanding England. In order to further understand England, he found it necessary to compare it with other nations. </li></ul><ul><li>In his work “A System of Logic” (1846), he argued that historical generalizations are only possible through comparative study. </li></ul><ul><li>He laid the basis for both the System and Modernization Theories. </li></ul>
  23. 23. <ul><li>PUBLIUS: The group pen name of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay who wrote the Federalist papers regarding the Legislative-Executive relations. Their theory has been tested constantly. </li></ul><ul><li>In stable democracies, an executive power is able to initiate policy and guide legislatures through executive autonomy aided by party control of the legislature (parliamentary) or independence from legislature (Presidential) </li></ul><ul><li>Hereditary monarchy was ruled out </li></ul><ul><li>Pure democracy creates instability by factional strife and a tyranny of the majority </li></ul><ul><li>In the event of disobedience, penalties must be inflicted in two ways: coercion of the magistracy (apply only to men) and coercion of arms (against communities, states and the like) </li></ul><ul><li>The papers became the starting point in comparing confederations and federal systems and of the difficulty of uniting and governing diverse groups within a state. </li></ul>
  24. 24. <ul><li>Max Weber : The most important single figure in the field of Comparative Politics in the 20 th Century. </li></ul><ul><li>Verein Fur Sozialpolitic sent out questionnaires to over 3,600 land owners in Germany. Weber participated in the analysis of the data gathered. </li></ul><ul><li>In his presentation during the World exhibition in St. Louis in 1904, he showed the importance of comparative method. </li></ul><ul><li>He compared relations among landlords, peasants and farm laborers in America and Europe. </li></ul><ul><li>He asked the question why the differences between the east and west Germany, between Europe and England and America. His explanation for this is the differences in the actions of players in the advent of capitalism. </li></ul><ul><li>He asked also the question why increased rationality led to liberalism in other countries and to authoritarianism in others. The key analytical procedure used by Weber is to break up a society into its major social classes and focus on the way in which each class is changed by capitalist development and determine how relations among the major classes with their participation in the political system affected by change. </li></ul>
  25. 25. <ul><li>According to him, while landed aristocracy in England and most of western europe was forced to give up their dominant positions because of violent revolutions, or was forced to share them with the rise of the middle class, in east Germany, the landed aristocracy played an important role. </li></ul><ul><li>The antipathy of intellectuals, hostility of workers toward their employers, the contempt of aristocrats to emerging new social classes and the moral bankruptcy of the bourgeois resulted to the downfall of German bourgeois liberalism. </li></ul><ul><li>He also used cultural factors in studying why the middle class in west Germany is more self-confident and politically matured compared to east Germany, of England and America compared to the European continent. (Protestantism versus Catholicism) </li></ul><ul><li>Emile Durkhem : wrote “On the Division of Social labor” or simply the Division of Labor in 1893 which become a classic of modern social science. </li></ul><ul><li>He tried to understand the consequences of modern state to individualism and freedom. He tried to answer the question: “Why is it that individuals though becoming more autonomous end up more dependent on society. </li></ul>
  26. 26. <ul><li>For him, the Republic is the only system compatible with a culture of rationality and science because a Republic is anchored on popular sovereignty </li></ul><ul><li>Modern societies are characterized by extreme division of labor which is necessary for intellectual and material development of societies but crises seem to increase along with progress. </li></ul><ul><li>The greater the realm of individual autonomy, the more do individuals recognized their interdependence </li></ul><ul><li>Social differences will be considered legitimate if they are based on abilities and talents </li></ul><ul><li>The division of labor became the starting point for his subsequent analysis of democracy and dictatorship, traditionalism and modernity and of the pressures of political transition and social change. </li></ul>
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×