| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Not long ago, many political scientists suffered from economics envy. Some still do. They view economics as the queen of the social sciences, claiming that it is "scientific," like physics. Physicists and other natural scientists spend most of their time trying to explain phenomena, but non-behavioral micro-economists spend most of their time on mathematical proofs and econometric tests of a priori theories based on intuitive plausibility or principles of "rational action." Being "scientific" it was alleged, meant that economics could access objective knowledge, knowledge that was said to be true independent of time, place, and circumstance. Robert Bates called on political scientists to do the same by arguing that they should be in search of "lawful regularities which … must not be context bound" (Bates 1997b).
|