Abstract
Questions about the conduct of political science which were considered settled in the 1960s can now be reopened with the advantages of hindsight. This is necessary not only because the early promise of behavioralism is largely unfulfilled, but also because after extensive borrowings from neoclassical economics, European social theory, and other recondite sources, our practice is no longer particularly behavioralist anyway. Unfortunately, discussion of these issues is hindered by subfield boundaries. For that reason, this article is not addressed primarily to specialists in political philosophy, philosophy of science, or hermeneutics, but to mainstream political scientists and to their graduate students. Some of the usual scholarly trimmings have been sacrificed for the sake of accessibility, and the author has employed a terminology of his own coinage in order to make the article self-contained.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
