Is “political Science” A Science?

[Tourist 0]

In many books, I saw that they say Political Science is a science. But I can’t understand how can it be science? They show many reasons behind to say it’s a science, but none of them satisfied me. Can any one explain is it really science or not.

[Thingcubed 0]

This is mainly just information gleaned from Wikipedia and encyclopedias:Political Science is a branch of Social Science. Social Science is the study of humanity/human influences that uses the scientific method. They're considered a science because of that, although according to Wikipedia they're considered "Soft Science" while natural sciences like Geology are considered "Hard Science."

[cangor 0]

Yeah, I guess that makes sense. To me it doesn't really matter what they're called. I think political science has a great deal to do with psychology and other "social sciences," especially if you're a politician or whatever and are trying to get people to do what you want them to do.

[awesomebill61 0]

i read somewhere where someone tried to say that any science which needed the word "science" on the end was not actually a science... but he was taking a stab at computer science, not political science. I guess political science is a science, but i dunno where a political science major gets a job at after college

[joeblogg 0]

political science is not a science. science is about animals, plants, man-made things and stuff but its not about politics. politics is politics and is not a science. i understand where they are coming from but i don't think it should be a science.

[kobra500 1]

Science is to do with logic and looking at things scientifically, i.e. using fact, evidence and experimentation, with politics you are experimenting with ideas, looking at facts that you know and evidence, i.e. statistics so you know what people want.

[networker 0]

No.Political science is not a science.If that were the case a sanitary engineer(i,e garbageman) would be hi tech.We live in times of political correctness.Too much double talk really.

[andresf91 0]

Political science, as social sciences, is science.

For a discipline to be a science, it doesn't depend on what they study (in this case political structures, decisions, etc...). What makes the difference between a science and a bunch of garbage some lucky face tell us from TV (most of those so called analysts, not all of them of course), is that political scientists MUST follow a scientific method. The METHOD is what makes science.

What's the difference between alchemy and chemistry? Why is the latter a science, but not the first one? Because a chemist must follow the scientific method. The fall of feudalism and arise of capitalism has a lot to do with the modern idea of science, so does puritanism. (But I don't want to ramble off-topic with this, check Hessen and Merton's response to him for that).

 

I'm not a political science student. I study History. You can call it science or not, but we follow the scientific method, the knowledge we produce has scientific value. We observe, make hypothesis, fetch sources (any piece of evidence from reality) and bibliography, we check if they're true, valid or important, then we evaluate them all together, and the result is: conclusions.

 

Anyway, the discussion of whether social science are sciences, or a low-level science or no science at all is almost over among epistemology philosophers. Denying the scientific status to a discipline that follows the scientific method sounds quite brought from the XIX century.

[abby 0]

I'm not a political science student. I study History. You can call it science or not, but we follow the scientific method, the knowledge we produce has scientific value. We observe, make hypothesis, fetch sources (any piece of evidence from reality) and bibliography, we check if they're true, valid or important, then we evaluate them all together, and the result is: conclusions.

This.

Also, political science =/= politics. Politics is the process of administering governance (or, famously, "who gets what, when, and how"). It can be dirty, manipulative, and corrupt. Political science is the study of this process, making use of the scientific method, statistical analysis, models, etc. It, like any other science, generally is scholarly and strives to be unbiased.

[dangerdan 0]

The first response got the critical point. Political science is not a natural science, it is a social science. The social sciences are generally defined as Economics, Politics, Philosophy, Sociology and Social Anthropology. Political science is only a 'science' in the same sense that any of these are. Politics is clearly not in the same ballpark as Biology, Chemistry, Physics or Maths because it is significantly harder to 'prove' a political theory particularly given that Politics is a fluid entity potentially changed by every comment made upon it.Political science attempts to systematically study and analysis all elements of Politics. Just like Biology does with the natural environment etc...

Edited July 12, 2009 by dangerdan (see edit history)

[iGuest 3]

foci is a science?Is ?political Science? A Science?

Yah! it is a science because it follow the scientific method, it is a social science that defined different subfields of science and systematically analyze the elements of politicsjust like the natural science environment. 

-reply by Erick Razalo

[iGuest 3]

My main problem with Political Science is the supposed use of the Scientific method. This requires experiments with results that can be consistently reproduced. Political Scientists state repeatedly that they can only experiment in controlled situations and can never reproduce similar results in any consistent manner. Therefore their scientific methodology is faulty and they should not be considered a science.

[sharmiladevi 0]

Let us first see what a science is. Well, we see a lot of definitions being given for that, its actually a deep insight knowledge of various things and happenings around us and it has its own calibrations, in simple. So, a political science can also be taken that way, which means, it also goes deep into the human political setup and has its own time calibrations for everything to be done. So a political science is a science I would say.

[iGuest 3]

No political science is not a true science. It is scientific in the way it uses central ideas that are derived in a logical way. Most aspects of political science is non scientific. Beauty, Human emotion, and speculative thought are not derived from fact and verifiable law therefore beyond the scientific method.

[sheepdog 10]

We live in times of political correctness.Too much double talk really. I have to agree with networker on that comment for sure!But science is generally a study of something so in some respects politics would be a science, the only problem I see is that in science if you mix 2 chemicals together, every time you do it if you keep the proportions the same, you are going to get the same results. There are enough variables in human nature this will not be true when you study what politicians do and the peoples reaction to their actions. For example, if you are a democrate, it was ok for bill Clinton to have oral sex with a female other than his wife right in the oval office, however, if you are a republican, if you even make lewd comments to a woman, you'll be drummed out of the running for the presidentual race. Along this same thought line, there are a few other simular catagories that bug me. One is the recent trend to call poker a sport. I think poker is a lot farther from being a sport than political science is from being a science. Sitting on your butt playing cards? How is that sport? And then there are German Shepherd dogs. This breed is catagorized as a herding breed. I for the life of me can't figure out what idiot put them in the herding group. No way a German Shepherd will herd, they will kill livestock but they sure won't herd them. You guys just knew I'd find a way to get something doggie in my post didn't you?