Exam 1 Flashcards
(96 cards)
1
Q
What is the purpose of political science?
A
The scientific study of politics is about application of the method of science to the study of political phenomena
2
Q
What is empiricism?
A
Puts forward explanations of phenomena and use observations judge the the tenability of explanations. An empiricist demands that data and observations support whatever point is being made.
3
Q
What is the principle of verification?
A
Statements can only be provisionally accepted only to the extent that they are derived from observational evidence. Doesn’t mean absolute proof, evidence has to fit the claim you make.
4
Q
What is unfalsifiablity?
A
A claim that cannot be refuted by any evidence. Examples- astrology, everything can fit
5
Q
Who made the principle of falsifiability?
A
Carl Popper
6
Q
What is a probabilistic theory?
A
A theory where particular anomalies do not prove it wrong, but are falsifiable. Ex- South tends to be more conservative, but there are liberals in the South
7
Q
Are all theories equally improbable?
A
Since all potential observations are infinite, no amount of successful testing will increase the probability that a particular theory is true. But, between two theories, it is rational to prefer one that accounts for all the evidence that a rival theory explains, plus all the evidence it does not.
8
Q
When does confidence in a theory grow?
A
As it predicts novel facts, facts that could not have been conceived without the theory (bending light, quantum entanglement)
9
Q
What is spurious correlation?
A
When two variables are related, but one doesn’t cause the other. Predictions are possible even when correlation is spurious.
10
Q
What is the difference between finding correlation and finding causation?
A
Science wants to uncover causal mechanisms. Facts do not always speak for themselves
11
Q
What is theory?
A
A body of statements that systematizes knowledge and explains relations between phenomena. Can be generated by induction or deduction.
12
Q
What is induction?
A
Drawing general conclusions from specific observations and examples.
13
Q
What is deduction?
A
Drawing conclusions based on on general principles and assumptions
14
Q
What is non-normativity?
A
Scientific knowledge is value free, addresses what is, what might be in the future, and why, but does not concern itself if something is good or bad.
15
Q
What are normativity?
A
Statements about what ought to be, which are outside the purview of science. They may rely on science and follow the rules of logic, but they are not science
16
Q
How do we know that theories haven’t been contaminated by scientists with human flaws?
A
The credibility of the scientific method is ensured by data access (data made public), production transparency, analytic transparency, peer review, incentivized institutional skepticism, freedom of academic inquiry, tenure, and a celebration of novelty
17
Q
What is transmissibility?
A
Anybody who follows the same procedures should get the same results
18
Q
What is cumulativity?
A
Substantive findings and research methods should build upon prior research and findings
19
Q
What is generality?
A
Knowledge that explains classes of events is more valuable than knowledge that explains a specific one
20
Q
Why do constructivists not like generality?
A
They argue it is a totalizing imperial approach
21
Q
What is parsimony?
A
The same principle as Occum’s Razor, the simplest explanation tends to be true.
22
Q
What is rationality?
A
The ability to use knowledge to attain goals, knowledge is justified true belief, and beliefs must be held in pursuit of a goal
23
Q
What are the axioms of rational choice?
A
Completeness, transitivity (if a>b, and b>c, then a>c)
24
Q
What is the Bayes Rule?
A
You have to update probability and beliefs due to new evidence
25
How do we obtain true knowledge?
We learn by observation, or derive consequences from known, established theories. We subject this to empirical tests.
26
What are the reasons for using reason?
When you demand justification for using reason, you have already conceded the game to reason. Using reason works. Has a better chance of getting us knowledge.
27
What are the alternatives to reason?
Revelation, subjective belief, lived experience (why should I care about this?), coercion (coercion triggers counter coercion), and traditions (which traditions should be trusted and respected?)
28
How are subjectivism and relativism logical dead ends?
When you say everything is subjective or relative, is that claim itself subjective/relative? Additionally, are the Holocaust and slavery just another narrative or are they facts of subjective reality?
29
Why do some say irrationality is necessary?
Love and art aren't rational (they are irrelevant to rationality), was Hume right that rationality is the slave of passions (meaning that reason is a means to an end).
30
Is it good not to know sometimes?
Avoiding knowledge that might be a source of anguish but that one can't do anything about, keeping juries unbiased, in peer review.
31
Can things be rational but taboo?
Market for kidneys, prostitution, taboo trade-offs, taboo hypotheticals
32
What is a straw man argument?
An effigy of an opponent that is easier to knock down than the real thing. Ex- Chomsky says children are born talking.
33
What is special pleading?
Insisting on special requirements and conditions, or exceptions for ones claim. Ex- ESP fails in experiments because of the negative vibes from skeptics
34
What is moving the goalposts?
Starting out with some claim, then instead of giving up when confronted with good counterarguments, repackaging it. Ex- Defunding the police, but its only about transferring a portion of their budget to emergency responders.
35
What is "no true Scotsman"?
A version of moving the goalposts where the person where a group of people is generalized into a statement, and any exceptions are said not to be part of the group. Ex- No true Christian kills
36
What is begging the question?
Making a claim that is based on an assumption that is highly contestable or that simply cannot be made. Ex- When did you stop beating your wife?
37
What is the burden of proof fallacy?
Usually, the burden of proof is on the person who makes a claim, demanding proof of a negative or counterfactual is often not a legitimate demand. Ex- Can you prove there is no God?
38
What is tu quo quo or whataboutism?
Confronting a claim not with a counterargument, but bringing up a new point in the hopes that it is made better. Ex- The USSR is a repressive state. What about the mistreatment of black Americans in the US?
39
What is argument from authority?
Using an authority to prove a point instead of a legitimate counterargument. Ex- 90% of Nobel laureates believe climate change is happening
40
What is the bandwagon effect?
So many people believe x, so there must be some truth to it.
41
What is ad hominem?
Attacking the identity of the author of the argument instead of making a counterpoint. Ex- The argument cannot be taken seriously coming from a straight, white male. However, there is skepticism if an argument comes from the biases. There is added credibility if the argument is contrary to the author's biases. But these are not evaluations of the argument.
42
What is genetic fallacy?
A version of ad hominem, relying on sources. Ex- That argument cannot be treated seriously, because it relies on CIA data.
43
What is guilt by association?
A version of ad hominem where counterarguments are made by the group that did x. Ex- Carcinogenic properties in tobacco were initially argued by Nazi scientists
44
What is appeal to emotion/affective fallacy?
Using emotion instead of factual arguments to try to persuade an audience. Ex- How can you look at a child being killed by a bomb and say violence has been declining?
45
How has there been a change in attitude towards certain fallacies?
Fallacies used to be blunders. But now, they have become increasingly common in journalism and academia. Sometimes, context is relevant.
46
What is God of the Gaps?
When every time there is something that can't be explained by your argument, you are entirely wrong. Ex- origins of organic life
47
How do social scientists respond to the argument that the hope that achieving the same kind of consensus as physics and biology, of creating the same paradigms as in physics and biology, have not been realized (Rabinow and Sullivan)?
Even in the physical sciences, the stability of paradigms is a relatively new one (and what does that mean exactly?)
48
How do social scientists respond to the argument that the object in social sciences knows itself and it has reflexivity (Rabinow and Sullivan)?
What exactly does this difference imply and why does this make social science impossible?
49
How do social scientists respond to the idea that practical understanding of context cannot be reduced to a system of categories defined only in terms of their relations to each other (Rabinow and Sullivan)?
Not entirely sure what this means, but it's probably about interactions being fundamentally context driven and not subject to universal laws. Therefore, we have to engage in interpretation. But how is interpretation possible without reference to universal laws or some universal regularities, which have to be at the core of any interpretation. And aren't all contexts just cultural and sociological variations of more fundamental variables.
50
What are the alternatives proposed by the opponents of science (Rabinow and Sullivan)?
There are concrete cultural meanings, but cultures can differ, but have similar bases and can be contextualized. Human existence can't boiled down to general theory and cultural contexts are separate enough that they can't be boiled down to theory. But also, empathy shows there is shared meaning and we can understand each other, which contradicts what we just said. We interpret our own values and others who study them are interpreting them. There are no outside cultural values, no correct values, but there are basic principles which are common across cultures. But we cannot explain this variation from the inside, interpret interpretations. You cannot look at practices and try to interpret them through the lens of the individual.
51
What is the general argument of those opposed to the scientific method in social sciences?
Cultural meaning relies on context, so baselines of the observers and observed are culturally based, but as a species we have some cultural realities. While they may think that social sciences is saying which cultures are right, that isn't true, and there is no absolute perspective and no final recounting.
52
What is the difference between structuralism and reductionism?
While they both rely on the scientific method, reductionists look at the individual without context, while structuralists believe individuals are shaped by structural conditions in which they exist.
53
How does the example of Geertz study of Balinese cockfighting show us that we can understand different cultural meanings?
Cockfighting is wrong to us in our cultural context, but in Bali, there are many different rules, giving cockfighting a different cultural meaning in Bali, which Geertz understood while being from an outside culture
54
What is the critique of scientism by the Frankfurt school?
As technology develops, different cultures become more connected, meaning that tech cultures have a homogenizing effect, which can devastate local cultures. But this is a political statement confused with the applicability of the scientific method.
55
How do feminists define gender (Tickner)?
Feminist define gender, in a symbolic sense, as a set of variable but socially and culturally constructed characteristics, associating with femininity and masculinity. But where is the evidence that all positive characteristics are associated with men. The feminist reaction also only complains about the fact the masculine characteristics are good and feminine characteristics are bad, and wants to flip flop them.
56
What does Deborah Tannen say about feminists doing IR?
After WWII, most IR scholars became unconcerned with level one (human) analysis, moving towards state and systemic level analysis. Feminist IR scholars, she says, bring the focus back to human levels of analysis. But this is simply untrue, many studies are level one analysis and cognitive science has become very popular.
57
What does Tickner say about the emancipatory goals of feminism in IR?
This approach is positivist, trying to distinguish how things are and how they should be. But, since social constructs reality, you don't have constraints, it is what we make of it, and people who make claims about reality have an agenda, and say that because it is what they want. But how can you strive for progress without understanding what impedes reality.
58
What does Tickner say about Martin Wight's argument in "Why is there no international theory"?
The realist/liberal argument that states are self-regarding, but that constrains our ability to imagine a more progressive IR theory, and change to a true community of states.
59
What did Tickner say about early American realists?
They escaped Nazi persecution during WWII, and sought to understand how understanding of realpolitiks is separate from morality and values. Morganthau especially believed that only a more scientific understanding of its cause could the likelihood of war be diminished. Here, Tickner acknowledges that Morganthau's goal is ending war, which doesn't go with the idea that realists say want the reality they say.
60
What does Tickner say about many feminists considering themselves post-positivists?
Post-positive feminism is an approach that takes into account cultural and constructed realities. It assumes that every approach, however, is on equal footing with science. But these approaches do not get us to form knowledge. Additionally, if everything is socially constructed, what is it if not a claim about empirical reality?
61
What is Cox's theory about theory?
There are two types of theory: critical theory and problem-solving theory. Men use problem-solving theory accepts the world as it is, and attempt to change things that way, but feminists see the world as characterized by gender hierarchies which are detrimental to women, they do not believe this. But this is problem solving, the problem is gender hierarchies, and that is a claim of empirical realities. The argument that everything is detached reality, nature, and history is an interesting one.
62
What is Tickner's explanations of how different traditions explain inequality between men and women?
Psychoanalytic traditions see how women are raised differently from men as the reason for inequality, radicals, Marxists, and socialists look for explanations in the structure of the patriarchy. Feminism is different from other forms of social and political theory because it is centered on an investigation of the forms of power that me exercise over women. But why can't this be studied through science?
63
What does Tickner say about the idea that women can just be added to theories?
These ideas are incorrect, because it can lead to misunderstandings, especially because in the past, women's knowledge was discounted, so they don't want their ideas to just be absorbed. But what is being proposed here? Why can't they just be subsumed under IR?
64
Why is what Tickner says about favoring male knowledge and disfavoring female knowledge incorrect, as well as that black women especially do not trust science, but prefer lived experience?
Enlightenment ideas are about not favoring the knowledge of any one person, you must use evidence to prove it. We don't believe relativity because Einstein was a man, it was tested. The principle Tickner believes is the same as authority coming from the Church.
65
What is Evelyn Fox Keller's argument?
Modern science, rooted in the Enlightenment, beliefs being objective is linked to being masculine. Men were the authorities on knowledge. But aren't Tickner and co doing the same thing, but in reverse, that women's activities are superior to men's. Also, how do I know what is true if I cannot access your truth claims?
66
Who does Plato think should rule?
The enlightened, with a restriction on inquiry for everyone. Leaders could lie for the greater good of everyone else, but if anyone else lies, they should be punished
67
What was Plato's view of knowledge?
Only some people have access to knowledge, by sitting down in a quiet room and think. Knowledge and politics should be entwined. It is outdated but still slightly persists today.
68
Who has claim to knowledge?
Opinions differ, we draw different conclusions about what we see. But we see differently. Our points of view are different. At the same time, we believe there are objective world independent from perceptions.
69
What are the alternate means to science for deciding who has knowledge?
Every man for himself, relativists, no truth exists, authority, coercion
70
What came before the Enlightenment?
After the fall of the church's authority, after Reformation and the political pressure to answer the question "who is right" and "who is wrong" when there is disagreement or uncertainty. Montaigne thought attainment of real knowledge was hopeless. Hume thought without the assumption that everything in the past will continue in the future, we can't claim any knowledge.
71
Why doesn't radical skepticism work towards knowledge either?
Skepticism refers to the doctrine that we have no reason to believe anything, so we should believe nothing, but this is a belief.
72
What is skepticism in liberal science?
The belief that no conclusion is above scrutiny or change. There is no renunciation of knowledge, like in skepticism, just certainty. No one has the final say and no one has authority.
73
What is the liberal game of science?
Each school of thought places their idea before a group. Friends/enemies of the idea test and criticize, poke and prod, check and crosscheck. Everyone is entitled to modify or suggest a new idea. The idea that survives this process is the winner- only as long as it continues to survive.
74
Should proponents of intelligent design and indigenous medicine be given the same respect and opportunity as other ideas in liberal science?
No, to believe incorrectly is not a crime, but it is not knowledge, it becomes knowledge if it is accepted by critical consensus.
75
What are the arguments for/against restricting knowledge?
Should we avoid knowledge that causes psychological pain? Can we produce knowledge without risking pain? Who decides what is painful or hurtful? Is there a right not to be offended? Is criticism or disagreement equivalent to violence? How do we distinguish between criticism and bigotry? Who decides and when do we stop?
76
What is postmodernism?
While postmodernism isn't really a body of idea, and is more a set of attitudes, it is a negation mostly of themes that have reigned in liberal intellectual life of the West since Enlightenment.
77
What exactly does postmodernism reject?
The possibility of enduring, universal knowledge in any area (all knowledge is local, product of social class, circumscribed by interests and prejudices of that particular group), there is no knowledge, there are merely stories designed to satisfy the human need to make sense of the world, in making stories, they track in unacknowledged ways the interests, prejudices, and conceits of their devisers. All knowledge projects are politics, by other means
78
What is deconstructionism?
Truly meaningful utterance is impossible, language is ultimately impotent, as are the manual operations conditioned by linguistic habit. The verbal means by which we seek to represent the world are incapable of doing any such thing. So, everything wrong is society is no longer explained by the mode of production (marxism), but the mode of discourse
79
What are some hallmarks of deconstructionism?
Impenetrable jargon (due to Derrida), reassociating an argument with different words, sense is restricted (they believe that it is constricting), narratives help those in power
80
How do postmodernists distinguish from good and bad stories, if not with the scientific method?
Who's telling them. Postmodernists make truth claims all the time (ex: women have been historically oppressed by men), their truth claims should not be placed under the same scrutiny, due to past oppression and identity.
81
Why did the first wave of postmodernism fall out of fashion?
It collapsed due to endless construction, if it's all deconstruction, why should I take you seriously?
82
What has the second generation of postmodernism done to revive the school?
They have a political goal to address unjust power relations in society and oppression. They wrote accessibly (no more Derrida), and identified injustices, with class as a secondary injustices.
83
What are criticisms of the postmodernists view of oppression?
Who is oppressed? Is Condoleeza Rice more oppressed than a white, male coal miner's son? Who speaks on behalf of the oppressed? What does this have to do with truth?
84
Why was Tickner wrong when she argued that adding experiences of women to knowledge can enhance objectivity?
Do we reject objectivity or strive for better objectivity? Though historically, some voices have been left out, that's not objectivity. Basically, she wants her cake and to eat it too.
85
What are some ways postmodernists contradict themselves?
Gender is a social construct, but there are also special gifts that women have derived from their inherent nature. Race is a social construct, but one can't be transracial.
86
Why is postmodernism attractive?
It says things that are popular among the left, but in scorning the Enlightenment, postmodernists are cutting ties with their roots.
87
What are some left wing principles?
Government spending/economic principles, social policy, progressive taxes, egalitarian world view, focus on people vs. corporations, govt. has to provide.
88
What are some marxist principles?
Capitalism is a system of exploitation, labor claims only part of their added value, profit is uncompensated labor, bourgeoise vs proletariat, abolish private property and private means to production
89
What are some right wing principles?
Traditional social values, unregulated markets, low taxes, small government
90
What are some woke principles?
Political correctness, protect from harm, offensive language = violence, oppressed vs oppressor groups, rejects universalism/individualism
91
When did Constructivism originate?
The 1960s, championed by French intellectuals of the time
92
Why did constructivism originate?
Most early constructivists were marxists, but by that time, they were horrified by things that were done in the name of Marx, and disillusioned by the problems of the Soviet Union and China. Nazism also contributed, leading them to be frustrated that modernity could lead to the horrors of the Nazis
93
How was the left wing changing in the 60s?
The left wing had been about the rights of workers and the proletariat, but it became about identity based politics, even as in the last 30-40 years the wealth gap has been expanding
94
What is the 500 missiles tenant of constructivism?
Alexander Went said that the US is more threatened by 5 North Korean missiles than 500 British missiles, which shows the main features of constructivism
95
What are the main features of constructivism?
Social construction of interests, relationship between structures and agendas, multiple logics of anarchy
96
What does it mean that constructivism is an alternative to materialism?
Meanings are socially constructed, meanings and practices are not fixed, they can change, whereas materialism says that objects themselves hold meaning.
