Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Political Science at the Dawn of the 21st Century
- Austria
- Croatia
- Czech Republic
- Finland
- France
- Germany
- Greece
- Hungary
- Iceland
- Ireland
- Italy
- Latvia
- Lithuania
- Macedonia
- Moldova
- Norway
- Poland
- Portugal
- Romania
- Russia
- Slovakia
- Slovenia
- Spain
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Turkey
- United Kingdom
- Political Science in Britain
- Biographical notes about the authors
Political Science in Britain
from United Kingdom
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 January 2018
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Political Science at the Dawn of the 21st Century
- Austria
- Croatia
- Czech Republic
- Finland
- France
- Germany
- Greece
- Hungary
- Iceland
- Ireland
- Italy
- Latvia
- Lithuania
- Macedonia
- Moldova
- Norway
- Poland
- Portugal
- Romania
- Russia
- Slovakia
- Slovenia
- Spain
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Turkey
- United Kingdom
- Political Science in Britain
- Biographical notes about the authors
Summary
Summary: Political science in Britain initially developed slowly and without a clear identity diff erentiating it from other subjects. It is often studied at undergraduate level in combination with other subjects, but there has been a substantial expansion of postgraduate work. There has been a particular expansion in the study of international relations. Paradigm wars have been relatively absent compared with the United States, although there have been distinctive approaches, but in many ways the development of sub-fields has been equally important. Although political science graduates have been relatively successful in their careers, funding uncertainties surrounding higher education are a cause for concern. However, discussions about the constitution in the wake of the Scottish referendum may present new opportunities for political scientists.
Historical and institutional context
Political science first started to develop as a separate discipline in Britain in the 19th century. However, in this early period it was not clearly differentiated from the disciplines it grew out of, in particular philosophy and history. Indeed, this continued to be a problem for much of the 20th century. Historians argued that the proper way to approach politics was through the study of political history; sociologists argued that it should be subsumed in their discipline as political sociology; and economists thought that it could best be studied through applying the methodology of their discipline. For economists it was insufficiently quantitative to be taken seriously and for philosophers it was insufficiently rooted in their subject. Lawyers thought that insufficient attention was paid to constitutional and administrative law.
Being a ‘junction subject’ between many disciplines was thus both a strength and a weakness. It enabled political scientists to draw on the insights of many disciplines: for example, geography could be added to those mentioned above. However, it also meant that the study of politics often looked like a field rather than a discipline. It lacked a sufficiently well-defined territory of its own and its own distinctive theoretical perspectives, methodology and research techniques.
In the first fifty years of the 20th century, the subject was largely based in Oxford and the London School of Economics and Political Science (early developments at Cambridge had not been followed through systematically).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Political Science in Europe at the Beginning of the 21st Century , pp. 583 - 598Publisher: Jagiellonian University PressPrint publication year: 2015