I'm supposed to be writing an analysis for one of my classes, so I think it's clear why I am instead writing a blog post. However, in deference to what I am supposed to be doing, I will write this post on the subject of my analysis, namely the field and discipline of political science.
You see, what I have discovered is that political scientists have a secret inferiority complex (secret in that it's not like they are printing t-shirts advertising this little gem. "I'm a political scientist, ask me why I don't think I'm as good as a biologist!") about being "scientists." It's a really big deal to them (I don't have to call myself one of them until I have an actual degree in the field) that they be seen as "scientists" who use the scientific method to figure out stuff. Scientifically. And yet, according to the book I just finished, "Discipline and History: Political Science in the United States", (page turner!) it is this very emphasis that makes political science a nearly useless field. To wit, I found the following quote in my reading:
"By hitching their star to disciplinary growth and specialization, to sophisticated methods and technologies to study political life, and by succeeding in their efforts to expand the new discipline into new graduate curricula...it could be said that their audience has been reduced to other colleagues and students."
The book goes on to say that every time political scientists have tried to impose more science on their discipline they have moved further away from being of any noticeable use to anyone (I'm paraphrasing naturally).
My point? Get it together poli sci people! Nobody listens to you because you insist on couching your findings in impossibly technical language and then wonder why your grand theories aren't being heard. One hates to say this to such educated people, but duh!
I'm just sayin.
No comments:
Post a Comment