The Development of Political Science: From Burgess to Behavioralism PDF
Preview The Development of Political Science: From Burgess to Behavioralism
the development of political science the development of political science FROM BURGESS TO BEHAVIORALISM Albert Somit STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO Joseph Tanenhaus UNIVERSITY OF IOWA PUBLISHERS NOTE: The complete title of this publication is THE DEVELOPMENT OF AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE: FROM BURGESS TO BEHA VIORALISM. All future printings will carry the title in its corrected form. A llyn and Bacon, Inc. Boston • © Copyright 1967 by Allyn and Bacon, Inc. 150 Tremont Street, Boston. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the publisher. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 67—17759 Printed in the United States of America preface Like most prefaces, this one contains little that is central to the argument in the text itself. Hence these comments can be safely ignored. Nevertheless, this may not be an inappropriate occasion on which to account for a collaboration which has now extended over a decade. As indicated below, we disagree on numerous aspects of our common discipline, although not really violently. Disagree ment has frequently resulted in a joint inquiry designed to demon strate which of us was most in error—inquiries in which both sides usually emerged triumphant. This volume is another product of these years of vigorous though fundamentally good-natured squabbling. We hope our friends—and here is where the real danger lies —will not ask which section is the primary responsibility of which author. Several years of service in the central administration of a large university has conditioned each of us to accept full blame for whatever causes displeasure and to be totally self-effacing when ever merit is involved. Over the past several years we have discussed so many ele ments of this book with so many of our fellow social scientists that we could not adequately acknowledge our individual debts to them if we tried. Where scholars have published their views, we have, of course, done our best to indicate what has proved useful to us. On a subject like this, though, the most intriguing ideas are as apt to be tossed about in informal conversation as they are to appear in print. More often than not we have only the vaguest notion of what is borrowed—and from whom. To those colleagues who have commented on draft chapters, our obligations are clear and heavy. We owe our best thanks to Vernon Van Dyke, John C. Wahlke, Evron M. Kirkpatrick, Albert Lepawsky, Bernard C. Hennessy, Walter F. Murphy, and Don ald G. Tâcheron for their generous and valuable efforts to make this a better book. Needless to say, none of them agrees with us on every point, major or minor. We are also indebted to our research assistants, Roosevelt Ferguson, George Beckerman, Harrell Rodgers, and above all, David Atkinson, for their part in developing the quantitative data on which much of this study is based. We are no less indebted to Dean D. C. Spriestersbach of the University of Iowa and to Pro fessor Sidney Roth of New York University for help in providing the wherewithal which made these excellent assistants possible. A word of recognition is also due to our respective offspring, Jed Lawton Somit and Harlan and Beth Tanenhaus, who assisted in some of the more routine but no less essential tasks. A final word of appreciation is owed our wives. For their interest, encouragement, assistance, and patience we are grateful. contents I. the present and the past 1 PART 1: A DISCIPLINE IS BORN 7 II. pre-history and origins 11 AMERICAN HIGHER EDUCATION BEFORE 1880 THE GERMAN UNIVERSITY AS MODEL ENTER JOHN W. BURGESS THE IMPORTANCE OF THE COLUMBIA SCHOOL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE III. the formative years, 1880—1903: the disci pline is structured 22 THE SUBJECT MATTER OF POLITICAL SCIENCE THE PROPER STUDY OF POLITICS DOCTORAL TRAINING APPENDIX IV. extra-scientific responsibilities of the profession 42 PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT IN PUBLIC POLICY EDUCATION FOR CITIZENSHIP AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS PART 3: THE EMERGENT PERIOD, 1903-1931 49 V. jjrofessional development, 1903-1921 51 FOUNDING OF THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION GROWTH, 1903-1921 DEPARTMENTAL STANDING THE “AMERICANIZATION” OF POLITICAL SCIENCE Vll VI. scholarly responsibilities, 1903-1921 63 POLITICAL SCIENCE AS A LEARNED DISCIPLINE VII. eœtra-scientific responsibilities, 1903-1921 80 EDUCATION FOR CITIZENSHIP AND PUBLIC SERVICE PUBUC AFFAIRS PART S: THE MIDDLE YEARS, 1921-1945 87 VIII. professional growth and development, 1921-1945 91 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION THE GRADUATE DEPARTMENTS-DOCTORAL OUTPUT, TRAINING, AND PRESTIGE IX. political science as a learned discipline in the middle years: the “new science of politics" 109 THE ANTAGONISTS THE COURSE OF SCIENTISM, I92I-I945 THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF SCIENTISM X. . the eætra-sciejytific responsibilities of po litical scientists, 1921-1945 134 PART 4- THE CONTEMPORARY PERIOD, 1945- 143 XI. recent growth and development 145 EXPANSION THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION VIH THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW DOCTORAL OUTPUT AND GRADUATE TRAINING DEPARTMENTAL PRESTIGE FOUNDATION SUPPORT: PREFERENTIAL PHI LANTHROPY, OR THE RICH GET RICHER THE INTER-UNIVERSITY CONSORTIUM FOR POLITICAL RESEARCH XII. political science as a learned discipline: behavioralism 173 THE BEHAVIORAL CREED VINDICAE CONTRA BEHAVIORALISMOS THE RISE OF BEHAVIORALISM THE BEHAVIORAL INFLUENCE XIII. eætra-scientific responsibilities and activi ties, 1945-1966 195 EDUCATION FOR DEMOCRATIC CITIZENSHIP PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS BROADENING DISCIPLINARY HORIZONS PART 5: CONCLUSION 203 XIV* quo vadimus 205 PROFESSIONAL GROWTH EXTRA-SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES POLITICAL SCIENCE AS SCIENCE
The list of books you might like
