Social Philosophy and Political Science
A well-known French sociologist and political scientist R. Aron once remarked that political science is not a science, since it does not have its own theory. The task of the political scientist is to give professional advice to those who rule the society and those who elect their political elite. At the same time, the political scientist relies, on the one hand, on the social philosophy and philosophy of culture, and on the other hand, on isolated information from the life of his society, the country and his previous experience.
Aron's opinion is, of course, an extreme. At the same time, it emphasizes the specific nature of political science as a social science. Questions of the evolution of society, its structure, the prevailing picture of the world, ethnic culture, philosophical anthropology, etc. should, in theory, be more interested in political science than the monotonous studies of what democracy is, what country is more democratic (and if more democratic, to what extent), or how to get everyone to vote for their candidate. Neither social philosophy, nor the philosophy of culture, nor philosophical anthropology stand in the service of political science. The situation is, rather, the opposite.
In political science, an original attitude toward the basic ideals of science and, above all, to ideals such as theoreti- cality, truthfulness and objectivity.
The scientific method, as is known, implies:
• a fairly stable and clear system of categories serving as the coordinates of scientific thinking;
• a certain system of ideals to which scientists are oriented in their work;
• a system of norms of scientific knowledge requiring the validity of scientific knowledge, its logical sequence, etc .;
• a specific selection of ways to justify the knowledge obtained;
• a number of general regulatory principles that are desirable to be met, not necessarily;
• specific rules specific to each scientific discipline of adequacy;
• special principles of ordering, or hierarchization, multiple interpretations of the truth, types of scientific theories used in science, methods of justification, types of scientific explanation, etc.
• the use of certain philosophical ideas about the world, which make it possible to clarify the philosophical foundations of science and use metaphysics in analyzing the growth and development of scientific knowledge;
• samples of successful research activities in a particular field1.
The values expected by the scientific method include, in particular:
• theoretical - the desire to give the results of the study a special systematic form, namely, the form of the theory; a feature of the theory is that it is able to provide an explanation (prediction) and understanding of the phenomena under study;
• truth - the correspondence of scientific ideas and theories to the fragments of reality they describe;
• objectivity - the requirement to get rid of individual and group predilections, without prejudice and without prejudice to delve into the content of research, to represent the studied objects as they exist in themselves, independently from the subject, or the "observer", always coming from a certain "point of view".
Compliance with the above standards and the ideals of the humanities and social sciences is, of course, of a different nature than the correspondence to the same values of the natural sciences like physics or chemistry. This concerns first of all the requirements of empiricism, theoretical, objectivity, criticality. These requirements are much more difficult to implement in the sciences of the first type than in the sciences of the second type.
The scientific method does not, of course, represent an exhaustive list of rules and samples that are mandatory for each study. Even the most obvious of the rules of such a method can be interpreted in different ways and have numerous exceptions. Rules can vary from one area of knowledge to another, since their essential content is not codified, developed in the practice of research itself, skill is the ability to conduct a specific study and make generalizations resulting from it. Describe this skill in the form of a system of generally binding rules is just as impossible as codifying the artist's skill or skill policy.
The most difficult part is teaching political science. There is no coherent political science theory, although political science is taught everywhere. There is also no unity in the endless textbooks on political science, because they do not rely on a unified political theory. Nevertheless, political science is being studied, and, of course, it needs to be studied.
To understand how the teaching of political science takes place, it is possible to pay attention to teaching to such creative professions as an actor, artist, director, writer, etc. The peculiarity of their learning lies not so much in reading some theoretical courses on the not-written "creativity logic", but in including the learner in the creative process itself. It is assumed that the pupil understands the experience of his predecessors, who seem to have achieved unquestionable successes in a specific field of creativity. In this case, a special role is played by the teacher. He must be not only a good teacher, but he must have talent in a particular area of creativity. A poor or mediocre musician, artist, director, etc. always or almost always will be the same mediocre students. A student can & quot; break out & quot; from the shadow of his teacher, but only under the condition of his exceptional talent.
In the same way, in essence, the training of political science. Like the "logic of creativity", it is, therefore, what Aristotle called the "practical science". These kinds of sciences are fundamentally different from ordinary sciences. & quot; Practical Sciences & quot; are not "theoretical": they do not put forward as their ideal the construction of a scientific theory. Political science is not theoretical in itself. It borrows theoretical positions from other fields of knowledge and, above all, from social philosophy. Political science skills are directly transferred by the teacher to the student, so to speak, from hand to hand. This does not require a detailed political theory, set out in a special manual. Another thing is that a good teacher of political science should be a person with a creative vein and that the student is unlikely to learn anything if he does not have talent in the field of political discourse.
How to ...
We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)