WHAT IS POLITICAL SCIENCE? What a Disciplinary Archipelago Says about Political Scholarship and Academia as a Whole
Research Mentor(s)
Michael Wolff
Description
“‘Political Science’ is greatly in need of definition” (Smith, 1886, quoted in Sigelman, 2006). This statement is as true today as it was a century and a half ago when it was written in Political Science’s first independent journal’s first article. Throughout its history, the discipline's purpose and objectives have been contested. A conflict between subdisciplines regarding approaches and desired research outcomes hinders the creation of a comprehensive disciplinary framework. Yet, division is inevitable given the objects of Political Science’s study – people and power. The discipline is having an identity crisis. To illustrate this, Political Science is compared to an archipelago, a system of separate and distinct islands. Unity is not possible in Political Science, and, perhaps, not even desirable given the variety of topics that it encompasses. By dissecting the etymology of the term “political science,” as well as studying the discipline’s past and present epistemologies, ontologies, and methodologies, I establish an understanding of Political Science’s relationship vis-à-vis the natural sciences, the social sciences, academia, policymakers, and society as a whole. This project serves as a self-reflection of Political Science’s scholarly contributions and provides a holistic image of the discipline's impact.
Document Type
Event
Start Date
May 2022
End Date
May 2022
Location
Carver Gym (Bellingham, Wash.)
Department
CHSS - Political Science
Genre/Form
student projects; posters
Type
Image
Rights
Copying of this document in whole or in part is allowable only for scholarly purposes. It is understood, however, that any copying or publication of this document for commercial purposes, or for financial gain, shall not be allowed without the author’s written permission.
Language
English
Format
application/pdf
WHAT IS POLITICAL SCIENCE? What a Disciplinary Archipelago Says about Political Scholarship and Academia as a Whole
Carver Gym (Bellingham, Wash.)
“‘Political Science’ is greatly in need of definition” (Smith, 1886, quoted in Sigelman, 2006). This statement is as true today as it was a century and a half ago when it was written in Political Science’s first independent journal’s first article. Throughout its history, the discipline's purpose and objectives have been contested. A conflict between subdisciplines regarding approaches and desired research outcomes hinders the creation of a comprehensive disciplinary framework. Yet, division is inevitable given the objects of Political Science’s study – people and power. The discipline is having an identity crisis. To illustrate this, Political Science is compared to an archipelago, a system of separate and distinct islands. Unity is not possible in Political Science, and, perhaps, not even desirable given the variety of topics that it encompasses. By dissecting the etymology of the term “political science,” as well as studying the discipline’s past and present epistemologies, ontologies, and methodologies, I establish an understanding of Political Science’s relationship vis-à-vis the natural sciences, the social sciences, academia, policymakers, and society as a whole. This project serves as a self-reflection of Political Science’s scholarly contributions and provides a holistic image of the discipline's impact.