Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T06:18:54.154Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Political Science at the Crossroads

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Ellen Deborah Ellis
Ellen Deborah Ellis
Affiliation:
Mount Holyoke College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Political science is at the parting of the ways. Its foundations have been undermined by the claims of law and jurisprudence, into whose hands it has been deliberately surrendering itself for the past half-century or more, and now its chief strongholds are under fire from the neighboring fields of sociology, economics, and ethics. So severe and so persistent have these attacks become that the time has arrived when the political scientist must decide whether he will allow his subject to be absorbed in any one or all of these various fields, or will attempt to reëstablish it as a distinctive discipline.

The reasons for this state of things are not difficult to discover. They quite obviously lie in the fact that in the pursuit of their basic problem—the search, namely, for the nature and source of sovereignty—political philosophers have so generally followed two equally futile and fruitless paths: either the path of pure speculation leading to a supernatural or metaphysical theory, or the path of legal analysis, leading ultimately to the juristic theory of the state. Indeed, during these recent years political theory has been so increasingly “under bondage to the lawyers” that it is little wonder that a reaction has come, and that thinkers in their determination to find the reality behind the formal juristic conception, are now repudiating not only the legal, but even the political, character of the state.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 21 , Issue 4 , November 1927 , pp. 773 - 791
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1927

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Beard, Charles A., “Political Science in the Crucible”, New Republic, XIII, pt. II, p. 3Google Scholar.

2 Krabbe, H., The Modern Idea of the State, translated by Sabine, and Shepard, . Translators' Introduction, p. xviiiGoogle Scholar.

3 Ibid. Translators' Introduction, pp. xxvii sq.

4 Willoughby, W. W., “The Juristic Conception of the State”, American Political Science Review, XII, 192 (May, 1918)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Ibid., p. 194.

6 Ibid., p. 193.

7 Ibid., p. 193.

8 Beard, op. cit., p. 3.

9 Cole, G. D. H., Social Theory, p. 81Google Scholar.

10 Elliott, W. Y., “Sovereign State or Sovereign Group?”, American Political Science Review, XIX, p. 476 (August, 1925)Google Scholar.

11 Duguit, L., Law in the Modern State, translated by Frida, and Laski, Harold. Author's Introduction, p. XLIGoogle Scholar.

12 Political Theories, Recent Times, ed. by Merriam, C. E. and Barnes, H. E., p. 80Google Scholar.

13 Krabbe, H., Die Lehre der Rechtssouveränität, p. 77Google Scholar.

14 Barnes, H. E., Sociology and Political Theory, p. 13Google Scholar.

15 Ibid., p. 31.

16 Ibid., p. 5.

17 Ibid., p. 5.

18 Ibid., p. 12.

19 Political Theories, Recent Times, p. 100.

20 Krabbe, , The Modern Idea of the State, p. 1Google Scholar.

21 Krabbe, , The Modern Idea of the State, p. 213Google Scholar.

22 Ibid., p. 39.

23 Ibid., p. 7.

24 Ibid., p. 66.

25 Ibid., p. 115.

26 Krabbe, , The Modern Idea of the State, p. 48Google Scholar.

27 Ibid., p. 110.

28 Ibid., p. 124.

29 Laski, H. J., A Grammar of Politics, p. 9Google Scholar.

30 Ibid., p. 55.

31 Ibid., pp. 55–56.

32 Laski, , A Grammer of Politics, p. 55Google Scholar.

33 Ibid., p. 57.

34 Ibid., p. 57.

35 Ibid., p. 18.

36 Cf. Willoughby, W. W., The Fundamental Concepts of Public Law, p. 147Google Scholar.

37 Green, T. H., Philosophical Works, II, p. 410Google Scholar, quoted by Willoughby, in Fundamental Concepts, pp. 113–114Google Scholar.

38 Cf. the author's article “The Pluralistic State,” printed in this REVIEW, XIV, pp. 398 and 406 (August, 1920)Google Scholar.

39 Fundamental Concepts, p. 113.

40 History of the Theory of Sovereignty since Rousseau, p. 157.

41 Willoughby, , Fundamental Concepts, p. 8Google Scholar. Cf. also p. 10, where, in rehearsing the viewpoints from which the state may be studied, he mentions the historical, the ethical, the psychological, the practical, and the juristic, but omits entirely the political as such, and p. 31, where he omits the purely political character of the state from the list of standpoints from which the state may be regarded. In the light of subsequent discussion (see especially p. 149), he would probably include what is in this paper emphasized as political under the historical, but without, it is believed, due emphasis on the political elements involved.

42 Ibid., p. 149.

43 Willoughby, , Fundamental Concepts, p. 173Google Scholar.

44 Ibid., pp. 159–158.

45 Ibid., p. 4.

46 Willoughby, , The Nature of the State, pp. 130–133Google Scholar.

47 Ibid.., p. 217.

48 Cf. comment of Professor Crane on The Juristic Conception of the State, in this REVIEW, XII, No. 2 (May, 1918)Google Scholar.

49 Fundamental Concepts, p. 50.

50 Fundamental Concepts, p. 145.

51 Cf. “The Pluralistic State,” loc. cit., p. 403.

52 This point is ably brought out and developed by ProfessorWilloughby, in “The Juristic Theories of Krabbe”, in this REVIEW, XX, especially p. 523 (August, 1926)Google Scholar.

53 Cf. Vinogradoff, , Historical Jurisprudence, I, pp. 84Google Scholar sq., and “The Juridical Nature of the State”, Michigan Law Review, XXIII, No. 2 (December, 1924)Google Scholar.

54 “On the Conception of Sovereignty”, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, I, p. 401Google Scholar.

55 “Austin's Theory of Sovereignty”, Political Science Quarterly, IX, p. 43 (March, 1894)Google Scholar.

56 An Old Master and Other Essays, p. 78.

57 Principles of Political Science, p. 115.

58 Loc. cit., pp. 495–496.

59 The Law of the Constitution (2nd ed.), p. 67Google Scholar.

60 Studies in History and Jurisprudence, p. 520.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.