Social:Post-behavioralism
From HandWiki
Short description: Movement in political science
Post-behavioralism (or post-behaviouralism) also known as neo-behavioralism (or neo-behaviouralism) was a reaction against the dominance of behavioralist methods in the study of politics. One of the key figures in post-behaviouralist thinking was David Easton who was originally one of the leading advocates of the "behavioral revolution".[1] Post-behavioralists claimed that despite the alleged value-neutrality of behavioralist research it was biased towards the status quo and social preservation rather than social change.
Key tenets
- Post-behavioralism challenged the idea that academic research had to be value neutral[2] and argued that values should not be neglected.[3]
- Post-behavioralism claimed that behavioralism's bias towards observable and measurable phenomena meant that too much emphasis was being placed on easily studied trivial issues at the expense of more important topics.[4]
- Research should be more relevant to society[5] and intellectuals have a positive role to play in society.[6]
Criticism
Heinz Eulau described post-behavioralism as a "near hysterical response to political frustrations engendered by the disconcerting and shocking events of the late sixties and early seventies".[7]
See also
References
- ↑ Chaurasia, Radhey (2003) History of Political Thought, New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers, p. 135
- ↑ Sanford Schram, Brian Caterino, (2006) Making political science matter: debating knowledge, research, and method, New York: New York University Press, p. 167
- ↑ Chaurasia, Radhey (2003) History of Political Thought, New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers, p. 137
- ↑ Jay M. Shafritz (2004) Dictionary of public policy and administration, Oxford: Westview Press, p. 20
- ↑ Chaurasia, Radhey (2003) History of Political Thought, New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers, p. 137
- ↑ Chaurasia, Radhey (2003) History of Political Thought, New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers, p. 138
- ↑ Eulau, Heinz (1981). "Foreword: On Revolutions That Never Were." In S. L.. Long (ed.), The Handbook of Political Behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Further reading
- Easton, David (1959) The New Revolution in Political Science, The American Political Science, 63/4: 1051-1061
 |  |
