research traditions: rationality, structure, and culture foundations of comparative politics Timothy C. Lim California State University, Los Angeles tclim@calstatela.edu

research traditions: an introduction to rational choice micro-level research traditions: an introduction to rational choice

theory in comparative politics research traditions rational choice perspective what does it mean to act in a rational manner? how does rationality help explain human behavior and larger social, political, and economic phenomena? is the concept of rationality too simplistic?

theory in comparative politics research traditions rational choice perspective what is self-interest and why is it a central concept in rational choice?

theory in comparative politics research traditions self-interest: key points self-interest is not the same as “selfishness” self-interest in rational choice theory is premised on the idea that all individuals have specific (“reasonable”) goals and that they behave in way that best enables them to achieve those goals self-interest is context dependent: the goal of a politician, for example, is to win or hold on to political office; a shareholder wants to maximize short-term gains; self-interest, in other words, is based on individual preference

theory in comparative politics research traditions other key concepts in rational choice preferences and utility maximization strategic calculation and strategic interaction what is utility maximization and why is it important? how does it help us understand human behavior? what is strategic calculation and interaction? what do these concepts tell us about the decision making process?

theory in comparative politics research traditions summing up thus far rational choice is much more than simply asserting people are self-interested actors Instead, preferences, utility maximization, strategic calculation and strategic interaction makes “rational decision-making” more complex than it appears on the surface At the same time, the key principles of rational choice dramatically “simplify” a very, very complex reality

theory in comparative politics research traditions a simple exercise rational choice tell us to begin with the assumption of rationality: we are all rational actors yet some decisions and some actions appear irrational: for example, what was rational about saddam’s decision to stand up to the the united states prior to the 2003 invasion? wasn’t he risking certain death? how could his actions be considered rational? discuss. adopting a rationalist perspective helps us undercover the rationality of seemingly irrational decision. in retrospect, we can see how rational saddam really was. consider the following video …

video removed intentionally see coursesite

theory in comparative politics research traditions a simple exercise: saddam as a rational actor but didn’t saddam ultimately make a bad decision? doesn’t that make him an irrational actor? dicuss. remember: rational actors don’t have perfect information. they can only base decisions on the information they have moreover, decisions are made in particular environments (the strategic environment): environmental conditions don’t allow us to do whatever we want; we are often constrained

theory in comparative politics research traditions rational choice and constraints what are the two major types of constraints rational actors face? why are constraints important? what do they do?

theory in comparative politics research traditions rational choice analysis: key questions who are the main actors? how are their interests or preferences defined? what is the nature of the interaction between or among actors? what information is available to them? what type of constraints do they face? how do constraints influence their actions? what are other elements of the strategic environment?

macro-level research traditions: an introduction to structural approach

theory in comparative politics research traditions the structural approach what are structures and how do they shape human behavior? what are the most important structures and how do they work? is the concept of structure too deterministic or too simple to fully explain the social world?

theory in comparative politics research traditions the structural approach and chess: consider the parallels

theory in comparative politics research traditions the structural approach: key assumptions structures are enduring, but not permanent (e.g., feudalism) structures contain specific logic and dynamic structures create particular relationships (e.g., peasant-lord, master-slave, worker-capitalist, dominant country-subordinate country) the fates of individuals, groups and societies are largely determined by their positions within a structure

theory in comparative politics research traditions the structural approach: key questions to ask what is the overarching structure and what are the key relationships within that structure? how does the structure work or operate? what is the internal logic and basic dynamic of the structure? what are the key structural rules of the game, and who are they key players and what are their roles within the structure?

meso-level research traditions: an introduction to cultural approach

theory in comparative politics research traditions the cultural approach: key points culture is a shared, learned, and symbolic system of values, beliefs, ideas, and attitudes that shapes and influences our perceptions and behavior culture must be constantly transmitted and reproduced culture is inherently and unavoidably intersubjective: it exists within our collective minds

theory in comparative politics research traditions the cultural approach: key points the intersubjective nature of culture means, to repeat, that culture has no concrete existence: culture is, to large extent, what we think it is (or want it to be) this means culture can be manipulated, redefined or re-shaped; it can also be co-opted Culture is here

theory in comparative politics research traditions despite its intersubjective nature .. culture has power

theory in comparative politics research traditions culture has power the ideas, beliefs, values and identities of culture have power at both the individual and collective levels they can compel individuals and whole peoples to act and behave in certain ways, to make profound sacrifices and even give up their freedom or their very lives

theory in comparative politics research traditions … suicide terrorists and peace activists, soldiers and conscientious objectors, freedom fighters and pro-democracy protestors: all represent the power of culture to motivate people and shape human society one particularly memorable example of how ideas can motivate action individual action occurred in china in 1989 …

theory in comparative politics research traditions the power of culture/the power of ideas watch these scenes from v for vendetta: both provide very clear illustrations of the power of culture/ideas

theory in comparative politics research traditions the power of culture the power of culture gives it huge potential as a political resource or asset: the is of particular interest to students of political science significantly, the power of an ostensibly single culture can be harnessed or co-opted by opportunistic leader and others to achieve self-serving goals: consider bosnia, rwanda, islamic terrorism on the other hand, culture can serve as rallying cry, a force for broad-based mobilization and progressive change: people power in the philippines, poland and the ukraine; the anti-apartheid movement in south africa; the u.s. civil rights movement