Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Mark E. Warren
PS: Political Science and Politics, Vol. 22, No. 3. (Sep., 1989), pp. 606-612.
Stable URL:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=1049-0965%28198909%2922%3A3%3C606%3AWIPT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-O
PS: Political Science and Politics is currently published by American Political Science Association.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/journals/apsa.html.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic
journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,
and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take
advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
http://www.jstor.org
Wed Nov 28 17:22:53 2007
Features
be mostly the history of political thought, atory, all explanatory theories involve, and
today it includes a mixture of conceptual, are partly determined by, the philosophi-
linguistic, and normative analysis, "grand" cal presuppositions that are essential to
theories of society and polltics (which are their explanatory power--an issue t o
which I shall return.
Accordingly, I suggest that we reserve
the term political theory (in contrast t o
political philosophy) for those d~mensionsof
conceptual schemes that select and orga-
nize informat~onabout the political world
for explanatory purposes-for example,
neo-marxlst theories of the state or
+.Gu
rational choice models of decis~onmaking.
Political scientists have always appreciated
that theories such as these suggest signifi-
comlng back t o life in new forms), and phi-
cant problems and hypotheses, as well as
losophy of soclal science. As a subdisci-
pline, it is broader, more eclectic, more provide common languages and conceptu-
al tools. What has changed in the post-
sophisticated, and more sensitive to ex-
behavioral era is our appreciation of the
planatory concerns than it was just two meaning-constitutivefunctions of theories.
decades ago. But we have been less suc-
It is now an accepted tenet of the philos-
cessful in developing alternatives t o the
ophy of social science that explanatory
neo-positivist terms we use to character-
meanings of terms are interdependent
ize the relations between political theory1
philosophy and explanation, and thus the within a body of theory. There are, of
role of political theorylphilosophy within course, many different versions of how
political science. Our failure leaves us sub- this occurs and what its implications are.
ject to the tacit blinders of terminological
distinctions. The distinctions I offer here as
alternatives to those with a neo-positivist
genesis suggest one way of more accurate-
ly depicting the functions of political
theorylphilosophy. They also suggest why
explanations of the political world neces-
sarily involve the diversity of theoretical
and philosophical concerns that we are
now seeing within the discipline.
Political Theory
September 1989
Features
September 1989
Features
September 1989
Features
The alm of political ph~losophyhere, of that we might understand the powers and
course, is t o make such normative judg- l~mitsof different possibilit~es,and gain a
ments into problems that one can treat awareness of our own
cr~t~cal
systemat~cally.At the same tlme, aware-
ness about the interrelat~onsbetween nor- Conclusion
matlve or~entat~onsand research can
guard against "scient~stic"political science The resurgence of political theory and
-that is, research that tacitly confuses philosophy is, in my view, part of the discl-
political or value problems w ~ t hsc~entific pline's recovery from self-~mposedmls-
findings, understandings about the nature of the
polit~calworld, and about how it is possl-
History of Political Thought ble t o know and judge ~ tThe . discipline is
healthier today because these questions
F~nally,a comment may be useful about are no longer marginallzed by an exclusive-
why pol~t~cal theorylph~losophydoes so ly behav~oralagenda. But ~t1s now tlme t o
much of ~ t swork by means of the h~story do away with the term~nologicaldistinc-
of pol~t~cal thought. Class~calsystems of tions inherited from the behavioral era as
pol~t~cal thought-from Plato and Ar~stotle well. These terms suggest indefens~ble
t o Marx and Weber--exempl~fy d~fferent roles for polltical theorylph~losophy,and
k~ndsof answers t o many of the above they continue t o confuse us about what
questions, answers that express central roles, exactly, political theorylph~losophy
stralns In our pol~t~cal culture. Pol~t~cal does play within the d~scipl~ne. The distinc-
sc~ent~sts lnev~tablyrely on the conceptual t~onsand interrelations I offer here--be-
and l~ngu~st~c tools prov~dedby the~rpol~tl- tween theory and philosophy, and be-
cal culture--indeed, ~fonly so that they can tween ontological, epistemological, and
take the commun~cat~on and slgn~ficanceof normative questions--provide one way of
the~rresearch for granted. Cultural aware- replac~ng these terms and explaining these
ness 1s no doubt valuable for ~ t sown sake: roles. They also advocate my own view
how else could we know who the we IS that the current renaissance of political
that 1s defined by a trad~t~on of pol~t~cal theorylphilosophy reflects a growing rigor
d~scourse?But, In add~t~on, study~ngrela- and depth in our understand~ngof political
tlvely comprehens~veand d~scretesystems l~fe
of thought 1s an invaluable means of devel-
oping an awareness about our own pre-
suppos~t~ons and values. The canon of About the Author
pol~t~cal thought 1s close enough so we can
recognlze our own assumptions w~thln~ t ,
but d~stantenough so we can recognlze Mark E Warren IS Ass~stant Professor of
d~scretesets of values, problems, presup- Government at Georgetown Unlverslty. He IS
author of Nietzsche and Poirtical Thought (MIT
posltlons, and m~stakesIt 1s never s~mplya Press, 1988), and currently worklng on a book
questlon of learn~ngand borrow~ngfrom ent~tledDemocracy and the Seif whlch w~ll
past masters, but also one of seelng them examlne relat~onsbetween language, pol~tlcal
as exemplars of the Interdependence of ~nteractlon, and subject~v~tyIn democratic
ph~losophy,theory, and explanat~on,such theory.