1. Approaches to the Study of
Political Science
Introduction to Political Science

2. • Political Science:
The Art to run a State is known as Politics. (Leoconk)
The systematic way to study State and Poweris called Politicalscience.
• Branches of Political Science:
Following are the main branches of Political Science;
• Sociology
• Economics

3. • Anthropology
• Psychology
These sub-branches are related with the behavior of a person towards ethics, his
vision and the culture of his region.
• Approaches to the Study of Political Science:
Following are the two basic approaches to the study of Political Science;
• Traditional Approaches
• Modern Approaches
• Traditional Approaches to Political Science:
The Traditional Approaches to Political Science were widely prevalent till the
outbreak of Second World War. These approaches were mainly related to the
traditional view of Politics which emphasized the study of the state and
government. Therefore, traditional approaches are primarily concerned with the
study of Organization and activities of the State.

4. • Characteristics of Traditional Approaches:
• They are largely normative.
• Emphasizes on the study of different Political Structures.
• Made little attempt to relate Theory and Research.
• These approaches believe that studies in Political Science can never be Scientific.
• Sub-Approaches of Traditional Approaches:
Following are the sub-approaches ofTraditional Approaches;
• PhilosophicalApproach
• Historical Approach
• Institutional Approach
• LegalApproach
Philosophical Approach:
The word "philosophy" comes from the Ancient Greek philosophia.
Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected
with reality, existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language. This approach
is concerned with the establishment of an ideal society with norms and values.
Historical Approach:
The historical approach believes political theory emerged as a result of socio
economic crisis and the impact they had on great thinkers. For instance, the socio

5. economic conditions of Greece produced Aristotle and Plato while the conditions of
England in the 17th century resulted in theories by Locke and Hobbes. As the name
suggest it is based on the development and evolution in history. It uses knowledge of
history and applies it to the understanding of political life.
Institutional Approach:
This kind of approach came into being in the 19th century due to the reaction to
the historical and legalistic approaches. It is also important to concentrate on the
executive, the legislature and judiciary too. This approach mainly deals with the
formal aspects of government and politics emphasizes the study of the political
institutions and structures.
Legal Approach:
The origin of legalistic approach can be traced back to the 19th century when
the study of politics also included topics like law and legal systems. This approach
idealistic as their concern went beyond how and why political events happen to what
ought to happen.
Similarities between Traditional Approaches

6. Philosophical Historical Institutional Legal
1 These all are traditional approaches and they adopta normative approach.
2 These approaches are old approaches to the study of Political Science.
3 These are also called empirical approaches.
4 These are ideally descriptive modes because they do not elaborate or lay
emphasis on the functions of the political system.
5 These approaches analyze the descriptions of political concepts and the
logical relationships.
6 These are very useful particularly in the examination of major political
institutions like the legislatures, executives, civil-service or the judiciary.
7 These approaches believe that studies in Political Science can never be
Scientific.
Different Between Traditional Approaches

7. Philosophical Historical Institutional Legal
1
This approach
came into being
in the 18th
century.
This approach
came into being in
the 17th century
This approach
came into being
in the 19th
century.
This approach
also came into
being in the
19th century.
2 Not Concerned
with History.
This approach is
concerned with
the history of a
state, nation or
country.
Not Concerned
with History.
Not Concerned
with History.
3
It is not usually
formal.
It involves both
formal and
informal history.
It is concerned
with the formal
institutions of a
state.
It is concerned
with the formal
laws of a
society.
4
This approachis
concerned with
the establishment
of an ideal
society.
Not concerned
with norms and
values.
Not concerned
with norms and
values.
Not concerned
with norms and
values.

8. • Modern Approaches to Political Science:
To minimize the deficiencies of the traditional approaches, various new
approaches have been advocated by the new political thinkers. These approaches
are regarded as the “modern approaches” to the study of Political Science. Many
thinkers regard these approaches as a reaction against the traditional approaches.
These approaches are mainly concerned with scientific study of politics.
• Characteristics of Modern Approaches:
• These approaches try to draw conclusion from empirical data.
• These approaches go beyond the study of political structures and its historical
analysis.
• Modern Approaches believe in inter-disciplinary study.
• They emphasize scientific methods of study and attempt to draw scientific
conclusions in Political Science.
• Sub-Approaches of Modern Approaches:
Following are the sub-approaches ofModern Approaches;
• BehaviouralismApproach
• Post-BehaviouralismApproach

9. Behaviouralism Approach:
David Easton first pointed out the intellectual foundations of
behaviouralism. This approach believes that there are certain uniformities in
political behaviour which can be expressed in generalizations or theories in order
to explain and predict political phenomena. In a particular situation the political
behaviour of individuals may be more or less similar. Such regularities of
behaviour may help the researcher to analyze a political situation as well as to
predict the future political phenomena. Study of such regularities makes Political
Science more scientific with some predictive value.
Post-Behaviouralism Approach:
Post-behaviouralism believed that the use of scientific tools is beneficial if it
can solve the various problems of the society. Behaviouralists gave too much
emphasis on methods and techniques and believed that it was better to be wrong
than vague. Post-behaviouralists on the other hand, believe that it is better to be
vague than non-relevantly precise. The post-behaviouralists criticized
behaviouralism on the ground that the latter had lost touch with the realities of the
society because of over emphasis on techniques. Thus, post-behaviouralists may be
regarded as the reform movement within behaviouralism. This new approach
emphasizes identifying and solving the major issues of political and social life.
According to post-behavioralism, the political scientists should find out different
alternatives and means to solve the social problems. However, it must be
remembered that it is only a continuation of behaviouralism. It does not altogether
reject the ideas of behaviouralism. It acknowledges the achievement of
behavioralism and appreciates its effort to do objective research in Political
Science.

10. Similarities between Modern Approaches
Behaviouralism Post-Behaviouralism
1 Both of these are Modern Approaches.
2 These approaches go beyond the study of political structures and its
historical analysis.
3 Modern Approaches believe in inter-disciplinary study.
4
They emphasize scientific methods of study and attempt to draw scientific
conclusions in Political Science.
5
These approaches try to draw conclusion from empirical data.
Difference between Modern Approaches

11. Behaviouralism Post-Behaviouralism
1
This approach believes that there
are certain uniformities in
political behavior which can be
expressed in generalizations or
theories.
Post-behaviouralism believed that
the use of scientific tools is
beneficial if it can solve the various
problems of the society.
2
In a particular situation the
political behaviour of individuals
may be more or less similar
In a particular situation the political
behaviour of individuals is not
always similar.
3
Behaviouralists gave too much
emphasis on methods and
techniques and believed that it
was better to be wrong than vague
Post-behaviouralists on the other
hand, believe that it is better to be
vague than non-relevantly precise.