Polsci 2nn3 Lecture 2b Notes PDF

Created by Turbolearn AI Positivism in Political Science Assumptions of Positivism Positivism is a model of political science that assumes the social world can be studied using the same methods as the natural sciences. This approach is based on three key assumptions: Naturalism: The social w...

Created by Turbolearn AI Positivism in Political Science Assumptions of Positivism Positivism is a model of political science that assumes the social world can be studied using the same methods as the natural sciences. This approach is based on three key assumptions: Naturalism: The social world can be studied using the same methods as the natural sciences. Objectivism: The social world exists independently of our thoughts and perceptions. Empiricism: Knowledge can be acquired through observation and experience. Ontological Assumptions of Positivism Positivists have a realist ontology, which assumes that the social world exists independently of our thoughts and perceptions. This means that social phenomena, such as states and economies, have an essential reality outside of the thoughts of the people that compose them. "The social world is composed of objects, whether we're talking about states or economies or voters, and these objects can be thought of as having an essential reality outside of the thoughts of the people that compose them." Epistemological Assumptions of Positivism Positivists assume that it is possible to acquire objective knowledge of the social world through observation and experience. This means that social scientists can describe the social world as it truly is, without bias or distortion. "We can accurately measure and describe the social world in a way that leaves aside bias. An objective account of the social world as it truly is, this is possible." Page 1  Created by Turbolearn AI Methodological Assumptions of Positivism Positivists assume that the correct methodological orientation for studying the social world is empirical observation. This means that social scientists should observe behavior, identify patterns, and use these patterns to understand underlying social laws. Methodological Description Assumption Observe behavior, identify patterns, and use these patterns Empirical Observation to understand underlying social laws. Describe the social world as it truly is, without bias or Objectivity distortion. Separation of Facts and Separate facts from values, and focus on describing the Values facts of the social world. Purpose of Science in Positivism Positivists assume that the purpose of science is to describe what is, rather than what should be. This means that social scientists should focus on describing the facts of the social world, rather than making value judgments about what is good or bad. "The purpose of science is to describe what is, regardless of what we think about what is. Describing what should be, that's an important question, but it's a question that is better suited to philosophy or religion, not science." Key Features of Positivism Page 2  Created by Turbolearn AI Separation of facts and values: Positivists assume that facts and values can be separated, and that social scientists should focus on describing the facts of the social world. Objectivity: Positivists assume that it is possible to acquire objective knowledge of the social world through observation and experience. Empiricism: Positivists assume that knowledge can be acquired through observation and experience. Naturalism: Positivists assume that the social world can be studied using the same methods as the natural sciences.## Positivism in Political Science Positivism is a model of political science that emphasizes the use of empirical evidence and scientific methods to study politics. This approach is based on the idea that political phenomena can be observed, measured, and analyzed in a neutral and objective way. Key Principles of Positivism Empiricism: The idea that knowledge comes from sensory experience and observation. Objectivity: The goal of positivist research is to describe the world in a neutral and unbiased way. Scientific Method: Positivists use the scientific method to develop and test hypotheses about political phenomena. Critiques of Positivism Karl Popper's Critique Karl Popper was a philosopher who critiqued the positivist approach to science. He argued that the process of empirical induction is flawed. "Empirical induction is the process of making general statements about the world based on specific observations." Popper's critique is based on the idea that empirical induction is limited by the fact that our observations are finite, while the conclusions we draw from them are universal. Page 3  Created by Turbolearn AI The Problem of Induction The problem of induction is the idea that we can never be certain that our conclusions are true, even if we have a large amount of evidence to support them. Observations Conclusions Finite Universal Limited General The Swan Example Popper used the example of swans to illustrate the problem of induction. Imagine that you observe many swans and they are all white. You might conclude that all swans are white. However, this conclusion is based on a limited number of observations, and it is possible that there are swans that are not white. Observations Conclusion Many white swans All swans are white One black swan Not all swans are white Implications for Political Science The problem of induction has implications for political science research. Imagine that you are studying the causes of war and you find that democratic states do not go to war with each other. You might conclude that democracy causes peace. However, this conclusion is based on a limited number of observations, and it is possible that there are cases where democratic states do go to war with each other. Observations Conclusion Many cases of democratic states not going to Democracy causes peace war Not all democratic states are One case of democratic states going to war peaceful Conclusion Page 4  Created by Turbolearn AI The critique of positivism highlights the limitations of empirical induction in political science research. While positivism can provide valuable insights into political phenomena, it is important to be aware of the potential flaws in the research method.## Falsification and the Scientific Method Falsification is a crucial concept in the scientific method, introduced by Karl Popper. It suggests that while it's impossible to definitively prove a hypothesis, it's possible to definitively falsify it. "A single unexpected observation can prove that your hypothesis is false." This means that instead of searching for evidence to support a hypothesis, scientists should focus on finding evidence that could potentially disprove it. The Democratic Peace Theory Example To illustrate this concept, let's consider the democratic peace theory. This theory suggests that democratic states are less likely to go to war with each other. Can you find any cases of a democratic state being at war against another democratic state? If you can't find any disconfirming evidence, you're still not in a position to say that you've proven your hypothesis, but you'll be in a position where you can say it hasn't been disconfirmed. Provisional Acceptance If, after an exhaustive search, no disconfirming evidence is found, the hypothesis can be provisionally accepted as a general social law. "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." - Sherlock Holmes Critique of Positivism Thomas Kuhn's critique of positivism challenges the conventional narrative of scientific progress. According to Kuhn, the history of scientific ideas is not a smooth, linear progression, but rather a series of revolutions and ruptures. Page 5  Created by Turbolearn AI Conventional Narrative Kuhn's Critique Smooth, linear progress Moments of distinct rupture, revolutions Gradual accumulation of knowledge Incompatible truths, moments of rupture Paradigms and the Social Practice of Science Kuhn's concept of paradigms highlights the social aspect of scientific inquiry. A paradigm is a set of ideas, beliefs, and axioms that shape the scientific community's understanding of the world. "The history of science is characterized by different paradigms." A paradigm influences: The questions scientists ask The methods they use The observations they make The Impact of Paradigms on Observations The ideological environment and socialization of scientists can affect what they observe. Example: The geocentric model of the universe vs. the heliocentric model Example: Observing the sun rising and setting vs. understanding the Earth's rotation Geocentric Model Heliocentric Model Earth at the center of the universe Earth orbiting the sun Planets and stars rotating around the Earth and other planets rotating around the Earth sun Constructivism and the Social Practice of Science There are parallels between Kuhn's ideas and constructivism in political science. While Kuhn denied making a constructivist argument, his work highlights the importance of understanding the social context of scientific inquiry. Page 6  Created by Turbolearn AI "Our ideas, the beliefs, the axioms that we're socialized into, these have an impact on our observations."## Observation and Interpretation Observation and interpretation are two sides of the same coin, rather than being held in sequence. When we look at the world, we're simultaneously interpreting the world. Raw data is interpreted as it's observed. The Role of Mindset in Observation The mindset we bring into our observation can affect what we see. For example, if we're expecting to see a rabbit, we'll see a rabbit. If we had prefaced the observation with a story about ducks, maybe we'd be more likely to see a duck before we saw a rabbit. Implications for Social Sciences When we transfer this to the social sciences, we can ask whether or not a similar sort of process occurs. Are we able to observe the social world in a pre-ideological way? When we make an observation of the social world, we're defining that observation as being this rather than that. Paradigms and Ideological Prisms A paradigm is a set of assumptions, concepts, and practices that define a scientific discipline or a way of thinking. When we're talking about observation, observation and interpretation, they're two sides of the same coin rather than being held in sequence. The paradigm within which a scientist exists shapes the world that they see. This has significant implications for whether science happens in the way suggested by positivists. The Impact of Preexisting Suppositions Our preexisting suppositions about the reality of the world can affect the observations we make. For example, if we're firmly convinced that democratic states do not go to war against other democratic states, this belief may have an impact on how we see the world. Page 7  Created by Turbolearn AI Paradigms as Social Structures Paradigms are not just ideological structures, they're also social structures. Science and scientific knowledge emerge inside of social communities. This suggests that we need to understand those communities and the roles that they play in producing truth. Social Networks and Paradigms Paradigms have social networks, which help to promote and protect paradigmatic assumptions. These social networks can be seen in the relationship between the Catholic church and the scientific community during the middle ages. Gatekeepers to Scientific Knowledge There are still gatekeepers to scientific and social scientific knowledge. We see them in universities, on editorial boards, and in granting agencies, all of which play a role in terms of the types of knowledge that is produced. The Peer Review Process The peer review process is a social process that plays a role in determining what sorts of accounts of the world actually make it into the public conversation. Criteria Description Type of The type of question asked can determine whether or not an article question makes it past the peer review gates. The methodology used can be a factor in determining whether or not Methodology an article is accepted. The conclusions reached can be a factor in determining whether or Conclusions not an article is accepted. The Grievances Study Page 8  Created by Turbolearn AI The Grievances Study, also known as the Sokol Square, is a high-profile case that made an argument similar to the argument that the ideological presuppositions that editors bring into the peer review process determine the production of knowledge. The study involved writing 20 fake papers using fashionable jargon to argue for ridiculous conclusions and trying to get them placed in high-profile journals. 3 scholars wrote 20 fake papers The papers were based on fake data and reached conclusions that aligned with the editors of the journals to which they were submitting The question was, will these articles get accepted despite being of low quality? ## The Peer Review Process and Ideological Biases The Sokal Hoax, a study that submitted 20 fake papers to academic journals, revealed that 7 of the papers were accepted for publication. The authors argued that this demonstrates the presence of ideological biases in the peer review process. "Ideological biases refer to the tendency for individuals to interpret and evaluate information based on their pre-existing beliefs and values, rather than on the basis of objective evidence." The study's findings raise questions about the nature of the peer review process and the extent to which ideological presuppositions play a role in the production of knowledge. The Social Environment and Scientific Knowledge The human aspects associated with curating knowledge, such as the social environment, matter insofar as what is accepted as knowledge. This process often happens quietly and subconsciously. Example: The International Monetary Fund Imagine working at the International Monetary Fund and writing a paper on development that disconfirms the research produced at the IMF for the last 15 years. The paper would likely receive critical scrutiny, with colleagues dissecting the argument to find out why the conclusions were reached. Page 9  Created by Turbolearn AI Paradigm Confirming Paradigm Disconfirming Conclusions Conclusions Scrutiny Less critical scrutiny More critical scrutiny Easier to make it into the More difficult to make it into the Acceptance conversation conversation The Selection Filter The process of scrutinizing paradigm disconfirming conclusions more critically than paradigm confirming conclusions creates a selection filter. This filter allows paradigm confirming conclusions to more easily make it into the conversation than paradigm disconfirming conclusions. Implications for Social Science For critics of positivism, the fact that the scientific community decides what the facts are means that social science should be done differently. In the next section, we will explore one of these models, interpretivism. "Positivism is a philosophical approach that emphasizes the use of scientific methods to study social phenomena, with the goal of discovering objective laws and patterns." Page 10