RAMONES, GERALINE MAE Z. 11028467 QUALPOL A51

ACTIVITY 1: CONCEPTUAL MAP

MATRIX I: THEORIES FOR PRODUCING KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE POLITICAL WORLD

Positivism Critical Realism Relativism

Positivism Positivism holds that knowledge is acquired from sensory observation and is grounded in inductive reasoning.

It holds true that facts are independent from the observer and from values.

It construes that science must create an objective empirical foundation to generate testable and valid statements.

Both positivism and critical realism identify the empirical realm of sense impressions and actual realm of events.

Positivism and relativism both concern that we can use our senses and perceptions during observations.

Also, since positivism is pure neutrality and relativism contends that all things are equally valid which imply that neither is wrong or right and true or false.

Critical Realism

Positivism only recognizes the presence of the empirical and actual, unlike critical realism which recognizes the empirical, actual and the real.

Critical realism doubts that sensory observation is capable of providing direct access to the actual realm.

Positivism holds true that science should be objective, but critical realism is disapproving of such claim.

And lastly, critical realism focuses that the facts can never speak because there can be theoretical biases on them so in order to have right answers in investigating the real and genuine realm, right questions must be posed.

Critical Realism sees knowledge as having some universal character.

It holds that it is possible to give a banal account about the developments but also considers that there are differences in methods and differences in subject matters.

It rejects pure forms of individualism and collectivism.

Individuals have severely limited ability to understand the social world.

Both critical realism and relativism attempt to resolve and comprehend reality as what and how it exists in the real and actual realms.

Both critical realism and relativism believes that humans inherently are based in their thinking since factors such as behavior, institutions and culture influence the individuals.

Relativism Positivists believe that the truth can be found through a systematic empirical observation, whereas relativists believe that there are no absolute truths.

Critical Realism maintains that there is some or absolute truths while relativism maintains that there are no absolute truths.

There are generalizations made in critical realism whereas in

Relativism rejects the idea that objective, universal and timeless knowledge is possible.

The truth is parallel to time, place and culture. There should be a construction of a

generalized picture considering the interpretations of individuals about the events

relativism there are no generalizations because all things are equally valid and it has unique contexts.

to comprehend the political phenomena or it is necessary to look deeper on the broad patterns attached to phenomena by various sectors in a society.

MATRIX II: APPROACHES TO THEORY FORMATION

Deductive Method Inductive Method

Deductive Method

Deductive Method begins with general ideas like laws, principles and theories and from these ideas; one can create a particular or specific hypothesis.

The hypothesis formulated will then be tested in order to defend and approve the general ideas being considered. The hypothesis can be accepted or rejected.

And once the hypothesis is proved to be true, one can now say that the general ideas used are also true. On the other hand, if the hypothesis is rejected, the general idea is incorrect so there is a need to rethink of this general idea again.

Deductive Method can also be ceased as a valid proof because a person base his/her ideas on known facts and arrive at conclusions.

Both Deductive and Inductive Methods are used to assess the information and observations.

Both can also be either true or false. It can be false once the initial premise is incorrect already.

Inductive Method

Deductive Method is from general to specific while Inductive Method is from specific to general.

If a deductive reasoning is valid, its premises are true and the conclusion must be true as well. Even new premises are added, the reasoning is considered to be valid as well. Unlike in inductive, if the inductive reasoning is valid, its premises are true but its conclusion can be false. Deductive method is more of preserving the truth compared to inductive method.

Deductive and inductive methods usually differ on how the person expresses the ideas and use them.

Inductive Method starts with specific ideas for instance, observations and from these observations, one can create a generalized theory.

Inductive Method can be likened to what detectives or investigators of crimes are doing. First, they collect and gather evidences and proofs, and from there, they formulate and generalize theories. Or like the lawyers who states first their conclusion, after which gathers evidences and defend the evidences gathered and state concrete ideas from what they gathered.

MATRIX III: FORMS OF POLITICAL THEORIZING

Normative Approach Descriptive-Empirical Approach

Normative Approach

Normative Approach construes how things or the world should be. Usually, the subjective point of view of what will be used is defined.

Also, it offers an idealistic view to improve and make better the world and things around us, whether idealized view is is accepted or not.

It offers circumstances and parameters to support, justify and defend why the proposed idealistic view should be accepted and promoted.

It is like changing or improving for the better or worse.

It also ventures of constituting and assessing both norms and values that will adequate for the expectations and desires of the society.

A distinct similarity between normative and descriptive-empirical approaches is that normative approach is answers the questions “what ought to be? and among of these alternatives, what can be finished more realistically?”; while descriptive approach answers the question “for the most part, what is done?”, both these questions can be combined together may end up with one answer and most of the time what is always done is usually what is the most realistically done.

Descriptive-Empirical Approach

Normative Approach talks about how the society should ought to be meaning there is a possibility of changing or improving; unlike in the descriptive-empirical approach it is more of gaining more knowledge about the object of the study but not modifying it.

Descriptive-Empirical Approach is generally based on facts and evidences but normative approach considers other factors and criteria during the analysis process before choosing what is best fits the study of the object.

Descriptive-Empirical Approach focuses on developing explanations grounded on facts, making it factual.

Aside from this, it is more of the description of the things or the world is and how it is actually going. It is the reality.

It is verifiable whether true or false since descriptive-empirical focuses more of observations.

Also, it is involved with casual relationships (the factors which satisfy the perpetuation of the phenomenon that should be explained).

References:

Burnham, P., Gillan-Lutz, K., Grant, W., & Layton- Henry, Z. (2008). The Discipline of Politics. Research Methods in Politics (pp.8-37). New York: Palgrave-MacMillan.Hay, C. (2002). Analytical Perspectives, Analytical Controversies. Political Analysis: A Critical Introduction (pp.1-58). New York: Palgrave-MacMillan.Routio, P. (2007, August 3). Planning an Empirical Study. In Arteology, the science of products and professions. Retrieved January 10, 2012, from http://www2.uiah.fi/projects/metodi/144.htmSaleh, N. (2009). Philosophical Pitfalls: The Methods Debate in American Political Science . Journal of Integrated Social Sciences, 1(1), 141-176. Retrieved January 10, 2012, from http://stthom.academia.edu/NivienSaleh/Papers/122928/Philosophical_Pitfalls_The_Methods_Debate_in_American_Political_Science