I have been retired ten years now, and have sunk from the noble study of politics to the scribbling of poetry. This alone is fair warning of the decline of my mental powers, leaving open to doubt anything I may recall. As to the future of political science, I claim little power of foresight. One prediction I dare: It is likely that in the future, as in the past, various competing modes of political will be embraced. Many practitioners will see approaches other than their own as ill-advised or simplistic or worse. The most generous-minded political scientists, and many merely diligent journeymen in their best moments, will see value in different avenues to the truth. With luck, no one perspective will triumph everywhere at any time. Neither philosophy nor mathematics, neither literature nor biology, nor any one method of study or system of thought will say it all or finally close off discussion. I celebrate our marvelous diversity of thought, if only it is marked by real quality in each instance. Having said that, I confess to having had no personal interest or competence in some forms of political science, but have tried not to take my own limits as evidence of the defects of those who pursue paths not open to me. For example, the more mathematical work is beyond my grasp, though counting things in ways open to all readers, as in the marvelous work of David Mayhew, I regard as first-rate, fascinating, accessible scholarship. Concerning Polity, the late Bill Havard, who came from LSU to Amherst to chair the University of Massachusetts department, was a key founder of the Northeastern Political Science Association and of Polity. He and our department, where Polity was long sequestered, tended to a political theory-based, nonquantitative study of politics, with little expectation of devising a science analogous to physics or chemistry. However, just as we were not uniform politically, we had members who used numbers as fundamental to their method, children of the great V O. Key. Central figures included our good friends Jack Fenton and David Mayhew (who was with us during 1963-1968). There was a sense within the department that political theory is the queen of the discipline, but our theorists varied widely; over the years they included Glenn Tinder, Felix Oppenheim, Jerry King, Bill Connolly, and Jean Elshtain, all winning our deep respect. I say this to suggest the soil in which Polity was nourished. We genuinely
Read full abstract