Introduction Knowledge and Political Science Stem from questions:

1. Introduction • Knowledge and Political Science • Stem from questions: • How does public opinion influence policy decisions? • To whom does Congress answer most? • Are judges primarily influenced by personal values, public opinion, the law, or the litigants when deciding cases? • Speculation and/or anecdotes are insufficient explanations. • How do we know anything (epistemology and a philosophy of science)? Alternatives • Skepticism – we can’t know anything • Realism – we can know some things with varying degrees of certainty. But how? D. Philosophy of Science and the Nature of Knowledge • Starting Axioms & Ultimate Source of Truth – the authority higher than which there is no other. Everyone has one and every ‘worldview’ has one. It is one thing to identify the source (how we know something is true). It is another to justify our use of that thing. Why trust senses, science, logic? Is it because empiricism, naturalism, Islam or the Bible is true?

2. Ultimate axioms – Every system of thought has an axiom or a fixed starting assumption that need not and cannot be demonstrated, and from which all other elements of the system is derived. The axiom is put forward as what is ultimately true or ultimate reality or ultimately authoritative (ultimate standard of truth). Or more generally, every worldview has a set of basic or ‘foundational’ beliefsabout reality, human nature, values, and truth which take precedence over all other beliefs and from which other beliefs and interpretations of the world are derived (consistently or not). Since the starting axiom or premise is considered ultimate or first, then it cannot be justified by any prior or greater authority; otherwise, it would not be the first or ultimate. • True ‘even’ of science – Science is not assumption-less or neutral. • Not philosophically: Scientists make philosophical assumptions before the experiments ever begin. 1. They make ethical assumptions (honesty is good, vital for research; we ought to answer questions in certain ways). 2. They make metaphysical assumptions (the universe is regular, uniform, orderly). 3. They make epistemological assumptions (knowledge is possible, there is a real correspondence between physical phenomena and the human mind). Example: The ‘Problem’ of Induction • Not Practically (in practice): Thomas Kuhn argued that science does not accept what the observable evidence discovers. Rather, it operates under a paradigm until that paradigm is strongly shaken by contrary evidence or thought and then a “paradigm shift” or revolution replaces that paradigm with another.

3. This course will focus primarily upon empiricism. II. Empirical Research A. What is it? Research based on actual “objective” observation of phenomena – to achieve scientific knowledge about political phenomena. B. What is empirical Political Science? The application of empirical methods to the study of political phenomena. • Why is this course helpful? • Political discussions are aided by using empirical research (e.g., death penalty and deterrence). • Students need to acquire scientific knowledge for their own work, especially at the graduate level. • Why do social scientists conduct empirical research? • Applied research – accumulating knowledge addressing a specific problem in the world (studying causes of crime and reducing the crime rate).

4. B. Pure, theoretical, or recreational research (knowledge for the sake of knowledge) – research not concerned with practical applications (who runs congress, the committees or the floor?). • Publishing – political scientists report their results in peer-reviewed publications (academic journals or books). • Examples to get us started (basic question is always What is the research trying to explain? And What is said to explain it?): • Research on winners and losers in politics • Who votes? • Repression of Human Rights • Judicial Decision Making • Campaign Advertising and Voting • Research on Public Support for U.S. Foreign Involvement

5. Studying Politics Scientifically • Characteristics of Scientific Knowledge How do we know anything? Modern political science presupposes one kind of knowledge (scientific process) Goal: Produce findings via objective and systematic observation and that are falsifiable to construct causal laws in the world. • Empirical Verification – statement must be proved true by means of objective observation via senses or experience. Not mystical, superstition, or commonsense based knowledge (these are not subject to empirical verification) • Scope and purpose – addresses what is, will be, or why; not what should be or ought to be. 1. Normative – knowledge that is evaluative, value-laden, concerned with prescription 2. Nonnormative – concerned not with evaluation or prescription, but factual or objective determinations (description). Although, the selection of topics, time periods, populations may be subject to researchers’ values; yet empirical studies are

6. transmissible, or capable of being analyzed and replicated objectively. Sometimes researchers do not replicate, they intentionally change research procedures to see if results change (e.g., two studies of aggressive behavior, children, and TV p. 30) • Generalizable – knowledge gathered may be applied to many rather than few cases. • Knowledge that is general and empirical summarizes information in broad propositions that may be used in policy debates (registration burdens, turnout, and states). • Produces explanatory information (this is associated with that). • Causal information better than correlative (X  Y) • Empirical and general knowledge produces • Predictive • Scientific reasons for phenomena • Probabilitistic (not certain; approaching 1.0) explanation

7. Theories are stronger or weaker to the extent that they explain and predict more and more observations. • Competing theories are evaluated according to their explanatory power (If theory A is true, we should see ______, On the other hand, if theory B is true, we should observe ______. • Acquiring Scientific Knowledge: Induction and Deduction • Induction – process of reasoning from specific observations to a general theory (observation precedes theory). • Deduction – process of proceeding from general theory to specific observations (theory precedes and produces expected observations). • Typically, Social Science empirical research uses deduction; “hard” sciences use induction. Sometimes both are done progressively (make predictions, do empirical testing, adapt theory to results, make more predictions, and so on).

8. Is Political Science “Science”? • The problem of behavior. It is seldom axiomatic or perfectly predictable. Subjects may: • Intentionally behave in either predictable or unpredictable ways when being studied. • Not fully disclose their true thoughts or preferences when data is gathered. • Measurement problems: researchers may mean different things with respect to certain terms or concepts (unemployment or politically active). • Complexity of human behavior; subject matter perhaps more complex than that of other sciences (atoms, particles, insects etc.). No theory in Social Science will or can be as generalizable as Einstein’s E=mc2 B. Yet, many empirical limitations confront the hard sciences as well. Paleontologists are attempting to obtain knowledge about the world as it was in the unobservable past. Astronomers and geologists are interested in places that are only infrequently and imperfectly observed first-hand (lack of repeated experimentation).