Merging of Behavioralism and Traditionalsm

 Emerged in late sixties; grew in popularity since Reasons: 1. Some political science scholars found the ahistorical and amorality of behavioralism dangerous and too narrow in its approach 2. Advocating Behavioralism--claiming to be value-free —is paradoxically implying value, i.e. the value of the scientific methodology 3. Behavioralism assumes reliability of the observable, devaluing the unobservable, invisible structures of power 4. Today, the majority of political scientists is in the postbehavioral camp; they seek to bridge the gap between normative and empirical analysis

 Theory tends to be starting point of empirical inquiry  Questions that there is an “objective socio- political reality to be discovered”  Acknowledges that facts cannot be neatly distinguished from values; the normative and empirical usually informs each other  Different theoretical applications generate different observations  Theory is useful but must be tested/applied to empirical reality

 Advanced first by David Easton  Maintains that political science should focus on relevant and empirical questions  Findings and conclusions of political scientists have ethical implications and consequences  Issues in politics are a matter of life and death, f.ex. War, environmental degradation, terrorism etc.; hence knowledge offered by political scientists often has concrete public policy effects, thus impacting people’s day- to-day lives