PAD120 – Introduction of Political Science – Political Science Assignment Help

Assignment Task

1. Introduction Of Political Science.
Political science is the systematic study of governance by the application of empirical and generally scientific methods of analysis. As traditionally defined and studied, political science examines the state and its organs and institutions. The contemporary discipline, however is considerably broader than this encompassing studies of all the societal, cultural and psychological factors that mutually influence the operation of government and the body politic.
Although political science borrows heavily from other social sciences, it is distinguished from them by its focus on power defined as the ability of one political actor to get another actor to do what it wants at the international, national and local levels. In contrast, political science studies institutions and behaviour, favours the descriptive over the normative and develops theories or draws conclusions based on empirical observations which are expressed in quantitative terms where possible.
Political science is an academic discipline that deals with the study of government and political processes, institutions, and behaviours. Political science falls into the academic and research division known as the social sciences. Social sciences study the human aspects of the world—human-made constructs and structures. Disciplines in the social sciences include: psychology, the study of the human mind and human behaviour, sociology, the study of society and the relationships within it communications, the study of the flow of discourse through media; economics, the study of the allocation of resources and history, the chronology, analysis, and interpretation of past events.

2. Definition.
Political science is that branch of the social sciences that studies the state, politics, and government. Political science deals extensively with the analysis of political systems, the theoretical and practical applications to politics, and the examination of political behaviour. The Greek thinker, Aristotle, defined political science as the study of the state. Many political scientists view themselves as being engaged in fleshing out the connections between political events and conditions, and by this understanding they hope to construct a world of politics works.
Political science is not a standalone field and it intersects many other branches like sociology, economics, history, anthropology, public policy among others. Political scientists are much sought after these days because of the changing landscape of politics across the world and since the society wants to understand how the political world works, they need someone to explain the nuances of the political economy. Any casual perusal of the newspaper and the television channels reveals that political scientists are at the forefront of debates and discussions for their knowledge and expertise.

2.1 Scope of Political Science.
The scope of political science is vast and experts have divided the field of political science into five subdisciplines that are political theory, public administration, comparative politics, international relations, and public law. It needs to be noted that these sub-disciplines cover the entire gamut of the modern political economy works. The study of the matters concerning the allocation and distribution as well as the transfer of power is one of the main preoccupations of political scientists.
The success or otherwise of the governance structures is gauged by political scientists who examine the multifaceted and multi-layered factors at work that contribute to good or bad governance. The scope of the political scientists has now been broadened to include the realm of the study of the democratic elections across the world. In other words, with the explosion in the political systems all over the world, political scientists, and their scope of study has been considerably enhanced.

3. Important about Political Science.
The government of a country is one of the most powerful forces that operate on people, corporations, institutions, and communities. And the study of the different types of governments and their policies constitute the discipline of political science. One might question why it is important to learn about governments, that is, the validity of keeping political science as a discipline taught in universities around the world, but the question answers itself. It is important to lean about the different governments and their scope in order to become better citizens who are aware of the strengths and flaws of their form of government, and in turn be able to contribute positively to the betterment of their political structure. In this article, we will look at this debate more closely and determine why it is necessary to keep political science as an important subject in school levels and beyond.
Political science is important because politics is important. Politics is the study of power who gets what, and how. This power can be as modest as a city council making budgetary choices over municipal services and personnel, or it can be as significant as two world superpowers on the brink of all-out nuclear war.
Regardless, the extent to which politics has served as the basis for the most important (and devastating) events in U.S. and world history cannot be understated. For example, certain political ideologies Communism, Fascism, and Nazism were responsible for the murder of tens of millions of people throughout the 20th century by regimes with fanatical beliefs about the proper role of government and its leaders. All people’s lives are affected by the priorities and choices of political institutions, and by the power structures that exist in society.
According to one prominent political scientist “the study of political science is motivated by the need to understand the sources and consequences of political stability and revolution, of repression and liberty, of equality and inequality, of war and peace, of democracy and dictatorship.” The study of political science reveals that the world of politics, along with its institutions, leaders, and citizens, is a complex and far reach in gone.

3.1 Creates responsible citizens.
Political science is the study of governments and the way they work. It is also the study of understanding responsibilities and rights of the citizens of a country. By reading political science, a person becomes more aware of the rights and responsibilities he or she has as a citizen of a nation. He or she is also aware of how a government works, and how they would be able to help in the making of a better government. Hence, the study of political science increases political and social awareness and helps in creating better and more responsible citizens.

3.2 Strengthens Democracy.
In modern times, the study of political science has become all the more important, especially in democratic countries. This is especially because people play a very important role in democracy. In fact, they are the be all and end all of this particular for a people of a democracy to be politically conscious. As mentioned before, the study of political science helps in creating better and more aware citizens, and that is the backbone of a democratic system that relies solely on the political understanding of its people.

3.3 Helps in better administration.
The study of political science also helps in imparting knowledge about the state, the administration, and the people. Thus, it is not just something that needs to be studied by the civil citizens of a country, but also by the administrators and those responsible for making a sound government that successfully runs a country. In order to ensure that all their functions are carried out to the T, it is important for the members of the administration to have sound knowledge of how the country works and what is good for the country. The study of political science lays down certain rules and guidelines that are of immense utilitarian value to the government, and therefore helps to avoid failure if followed meticulously.

3.4 Imparts world knowledge.
All said and done, political science is not just about how useful it is in the practical sense of the world, although it is a very practical science in itself. On the other end of the spectrum, political science also helps in imparting knowledge about the world in general. When you study what is happening in the countries around the world, what issues the people are facing and which new laws are being implemented, you are basically reading practical implementation of the guidelines laid down in your political science course books. In order to truly understand and appreciate the news that you have at least some understand of political science. And the process goes the other way around too while studying political science, you are also required to study international affairs as everything affects everything else some way or the other.

3.4 More awareness.
The study of political science enables the people not just to understand the structure of the government, but also the workings of the state, the separation of power, the judicial and legal system, and the entitlement of the citizens, the schemes of welfare and social services, and human and animal rights.
Studying political science opens up to the individual that entire world. It is like looking into the administrative machine and learning how each cog is placed, and its function. As part of a country, each citizens is an important part of the machinery, and learning political science is akin to piling each nut and each bolt in the machine. By studying political science from a very rudimentary level, we can ensure that we will all become responsible and are citizens who can benefit from and contribute to the successful running of a nation.

4. Cross-Disciplinary Connections.
What distinguishes political science as an academic discipline is its emphasis on government and power. However, the study of government and power is not confined to political science it naturally permeates into other social sciences as well.

4.1 Economics.
Economic and political processes are closely related because the actions of political institutions frame and can either expand or constrain economic activity. Republicans are more likely to promote free-market policies such as tax breaks and business deregulation, while Democrats favor business regulation and government intervention as a way of promoting economic equality. Additionally, economic conditions can have a direct influence on political institutions. Throughout history, the outcomes of many presidential and congressional elections have rested on the economy. Voters tend to vote against the party in power if they perceive a decline or standstill in their personal financial situations.

4.2 Sociology.
Political scientists also study the social bases of politics. For example, what are the political activities of various social classes, races, ethnicities, and religions? How do political values, attitudes, and beliefs come about? How do social forces work together to change political policies on issues such as abortion, criminal justice, foreign policy, and welfare? How do social movements outside of the formal institutions of political power affect politics? For example, the civil rights and women’s suffrage movements helped to not only reshape public policy but public opinion as well.

4.3 History.
Political scientists attempt to analyse and understand historic political patterns in addition to specific political events. This requires putting historical event sand texts into a political context. For example, how have political party systems helped to create long-standing changes in the electoral landscape and reshape traditional party coalitions throughout the 19th and 20th centuries? A good textual example is the U.S. Constitution. Itis both ahistorical (and historic) document, in that it describes the creation of a new form of government by the Founding Fathers, and a political one, in that it sets the framework for the functioning of the U.S. government as a system of shared powers, checks and balances, and federalism.

5. Subdisciplines in Political Science.
Political science is organized into several subdisciplines, each representing a major subject area of teaching and research in colleges and universities. These subdisciplines include comparative politics, American politics, international relations, political theory, public administration, public policy, and political behaviour.

5.1 Comparative Politics.
Comparative politics involves the study of the politics of different countries. Some subdisciplines study a single country or a culturally similar group of nations, such as the countries of Southeast Asia or Latin America. Political scientists who study these countries, also known as “area specialists,” tend to be well versed in the languages, histories, and cultures that are most relevant to their work. Other political scientists compare countries that are culturally, politically, and linguistically dissimilar. These comparisons are often motivated by the need to develop and test theories for example, theories of why revolutions happen. This may lead political scientists to discover commonalities between countries that are widely separated and appear very different. For example, political scientists have found many similarities between the transitions from authoritarian rule to democracy in Latin America and Eastern Europe in the 1980s and 1990s.

5.2 American Politics.
Political scientists usually organize the study of their own country into a separate subdiscipline, so within the United States, American politics is recognized as its own specialty. Given the size of the United States and its role as a world superpower, the American politics subdiscipline is very large. Political scientists interested in American politics often study political institutions such as Congress, the presidency, and the judiciary. They also examine the various factors that impact these institutions, such as political parties, elections, public opinion, voting, and interest groups.

5.3 International Relations.
International relations is the study of the interactions between nations, international organizations, and multinational corporations. There are two traditional approaches used by international-relations scholars realism and liberalism. Real is emphasizes the danger of the international system, where war is always a possibility and the only source of order is the balance of power. Liberalism is more idealistic and hopeful, emphasizing the problem-solving abilities of international institutions such as the United Nations, NATO, and the World Trade Organization. According to many scholars, after the Soviet Union dissolved and the Cold War ended in 1991, the balance of opinion briefly shifted in favor of liberalism, but realists were quick to point to the potential for future international conflicts.

5.4 Political Theory.
Political theory involves the study of philosophical thought about politics from ancient Greece to the present. Political theory is concerned with the fund a mental questions of public life. It addresses such issues as the nature of political authority, the relationship of the state to the individual, and citizens’ obligations and responsibilities to one another. Political theory seeks to interpret abstract concepts such as liberty, justice, human rights, and power, and in so doing it draws upon classics in the field by, for example, Plato, Aristotle, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, David Hume, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and John Stuart Mill. Many scholars use these classics to help them fully understand present-day issues such as terrorism, civil rights and liberties, and domestic and foreign policy.

5.5 Public Administration.
Political scientists interested in public administration study government organizations. Public administration is the art, science, and practice of effectively managing government. Americans are impacted in innumerable ways by the actions of public administrators (also known as “bureaucrats”), often without even being aware of it. Government is one of the largest employers in the United States, and government spending accounts for almost half of the gross national product. In addition, with increasing interaction between the public and private sectors, those who do not work in government increasingly must work with government, making an understanding of government and public administration essential.

Public administration includes the study of public financing and budgeting systems, public management, human resources, public-policy analysis, non-profit management, and urban planning. Political scientists investigate how these organizations work, and try to devise methods of improving them. For example, the landmark book Reinventing Government (1992) inspired many state and local governments (as well as the federal government) to cut red tape and adopt more competitive, efficient, and customer-friendly approaches to delivering services to the public.

5.6 Public Policy.
The subdiscipline of public policy involves the study of specific policy problem sand governmental responses to them. Political scientists involved in the study of public policy attempt to devise solutions for problems of public concern. They study issues such as health care, pollution, crime, welfare, and the economy. Public policy is about problem solving, designing and implementing strategies, and evaluating out comes. Additionally, this field is concerned with the process of policymaking and the many actors and agencies that are involved in it.

5.7 Public Behaviour.
Political behaviour involves the study of how people participate in political processes and respond to political activity. The field emphasizes the study of voting behaviour, which can be affected by social pressures; the effects of individual psychology, such as emotional attachments to parties or leaders; and the rational self-interests of voters. The effects of gender, ethnicity, religion, income, and the media are also factors in analyzing political behaviour. The results of these studies are applied during the planning of campaigns and elections, and influence the design of advertisements and political-party platforms.

6. The relevance of Political Science.
The charge that Political Science (or other non-STEM disciplines) is lacking relevance and does not produce interesting research is made then and again, with two new pieces published these days. One is written by a political economist, stating that most research is boring; one is written by a German political scientist echoing this claim and arguing that political science lacks relevance (written in German). The underpinnings of these claims sound familiar: the discipline and publishing system does not reward innovative, new research; it is all focus on journal publications; research is a means for getting third-party funding (junior) researchers are not courageous enough political science focuses too much on the rigor of their methods instead of relevant research questions.
I have some sympathies with these claims and it is not bad if the discipline gets stirred up from time to time. Leaving aside that I find these claims a little bit disrespectful vis-à-vis all the political scientists who do good research day-in day-out, I think there are multiple issues that make these charges too simplistic and deserve more scrutiny (the German contribution in particular because it raises more points). I have a couple of lose thoughts referring to different dimensions of the debate.

6.1 The reference point.
It is not obvious to me that political science was more relevant 20 years ago or so. If it comes to big names and relevance in Germany, one can immediately think of Habermas, Scharpf, Dahrendorff and others. Admittedly, I cannot tell who the Habermas of our times is, but there are researchers such as Munkler and Rainer Forst who are engaged in public debate on a regular basis. I also see a lot of political scientists on TV on different channels (such as Korte and Faas on elections) and do not believe we have a problem here. At least, it is far from obvious that political scientists had more screen time 30 years ago or were more relevant in any other respect.
The perception of the past might be biased by a small number of truly outstanding people who had great influence and which make us overlook that many political scientists are engaged today. This might also be a matter of a changed media environment. If you wrote something in the FAZ or appeared on ARD 30 years ago, you could reach many more people than today with a more scattered media landscape.

6.2 Kind of relevance.
With the current rise in scepticism regarding the establishment, which includes people in academia, one can question whether relevance should be measured in terms of media appearances because the “mainstream media” is also considered to be part of “the establishment”. There have been some calls that science should stand up to the establishment criticism, but this can hardly be a matter of junior researchers alone. Certainly, it would be useful, if not necessary to launch some initiatives (although I could not tell at the moment of what kind). Since the current situation is an unprecedented one for most of us, it might simply take somewhat more time to develop ideas and bring them to life.

6.3 Rigor isn’t the problem.
If one measures ‘relevance’ as media appearances, the increasing rigor of political science cannot be the sole problem, if at all. In Germany, economists dominate the public debate, even on topics that fall right into the field of sociology or political science. These are economists publishing articles that usually are at least as rigorous as political science articles (and as boring, by the standards of the critics). This indicates that you can do methodologically sophisticated research and be publicly engaged at the same time. In German political science, it might be a problem of the discipline in the sense that public activities are considered as “non-scientific” or a waste of time. I do not know whether this holds true, but I believe this is not an issue as long as one keeps a balance and continues doing research.

6.4 Big questions need time.
Big research questions cannot be addressed within a couple of years. I do not know, but I imagine that Piketty worked for more than ten years on his book because of his impressive data collection effort and its broad coverage (I guess this a study the critics would consider relevant). Because of the very nature of big questions, it is impossible for PhD researchers to try answering them. The same holds for Post-Docs and tenure track researchers who have up to six years or so to get a professorship. If at all, then, tenured researchers can approach the big issues of our time. (Maybe junior researchers can start such a project on the side, but the actual output will not be ready until they are senior researchers.)

6.5 Complex issues might require small question.
It seems fair to argue that the focus on small research questions reflects the idea of cumulative research where we get the broader picture by bringing together the results of multiple small studies on the same topic. (I leave it open here how well the idea of cumulative research works in practice.) However, there is also a substantive reason for partitioning big questions into smaller ones (Geddes has written about this).
For what we know today, big questions deserve complex answers, not simple ones. If we were accepting Piketty’s conclusions about income and wealth, we might want to address the question of how the state can redistribute wealth and decrease inequality. It would be nice to have a big theory of redistribution, but it is quite a challenge because you have to account for the tax system, the welfare state, capital mobility, political institutions etc. So why not decompose the big research question into a smaller one and approach one manageable question at a time? Answering big research questions does not require a big one-shot project. (I do not know how many researchers do this, I just want to raise the option here.)

6.6 The era of collaborative research.
Because of the complexity of many political issues and the rising standards in terms of theory and methods in our field, it might be useful to discard the idea that one researcher can do this. Piketty shows that one person can pull off a big project, but I think this is getting increasingly demanding because the low-hanging fruit has been picked. Here, I particularly think of the “fruit” as data because data such as welfare expenditure of OECD members have been used a zillion-times. The V-DEM project is a good example of a collective endeavor covering generating new data and insights that could hardly be done in the same way by a single person.

6.7 No rigor-relevance trade-off.
On a more substantive dimension, I want to argue against the idea of giving up some rigor in favour of higher relevance. (The German article reads like this in the last paragraph, but I am not sure whether this is the message.) If you want to address a big research question, you might need to work with data of questionable validity and do not have a sound identification strategy. This is not a problem per se because this is then the data and design you have to live with. However, this should not undermine the rigor of the analysis because rigor depends on taking into account the data quality and quality of the design when drawing conclusions. What is affected is the uncertainty of your conclusions that should be higher compared to a study with more valid data and a better identification strategy. If you do proper research when answering a big question, you might face a relevance-certainty trade-off, not a rigor-relevance trade-off.
All in all, I think a healthy, productive discipline needs a mix of people working on big questions and smaller questions that build on each other’s work. In any case, achieving the highest possible standards during the analysis should be the common denominator of all political science research. In the initial post, I called it a relevance-uncertainty trade-off. I noted this is not a trade-off, but a positive association. I therefore modified the post and now coin it a relevance-certainty trade-off.

7. Conclusion.
The paper analysed the scientific approach of research and made equal comparison to the study of political science. The scientific approach looks more tangible and reflective results compared to the social science approach. The paper concluded that political analysis therefore cannot be classified as a scientific enterprise. For long time, the study has based its reflections on descriptions obtained through observations.
The fact that these systems are undergoing transformations to include statistical inferences suggests the birth of a new approach to the subject. At the moment, the scientific requirements for a theory to satisfy the discussed expectation of a scientific study do not allow the prevalent method in political analysis to be described as a scientific approach. Deductive reasoning may not be practical in political analysis since every time the research is carried out, the probability of obtaining different data is high.