The case for methodological naturalisation: Between political theory and political science
| Published date | 01 November 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/13691481221113218 |
| Author | Nahshon Perez |
| Date | 01 November 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Original Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/13691481221113218
The British Journal of Politics and
International Relations
2023, Vol. 25(4) 617 –632
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/13691481221113218
journals.sagepub.com/home/bpi
The case for methodological
naturalisation: Between
political theory and political
science
Nahshon Perez
Abstract
Contemporary political theory demonstrates a turn towards data-sensitive research. Waldron,
Shapiro, Carens, Blau and Floyd emphasise the importance of grounding political theory in empirical
data. Political scientists developed methods aimed at improving the ways in which political institutions
are studied. What can empirical political theory borrow from this literature, that would advance
its aim to precisely evaluate political institutions? It is suggested to naturalise within political theory
political-science methods. We point to three methods: the usage of case studies, avoiding sampling
by the dependent variable and process tracing. In order to demonstrate their relevance, we re-read
three studies in contemporary political theory (by Walzer, Spinner-Halev and Wenar), in light of
the noted methods. If empirical political theory aims to fulfil its own stated goals and evaluate the
desirability of political institutions according to reliable data regarding their functionality, it would
greatly benefit from naturalising the methods of political science.
Keywords
case studies, contextualism, methodology, Michael Walzer, political theory, process tracing,
research design
In recent years, many political theorists have demonstrated a pointed interest in political
institutions and behaviour as they are; like the work of R. Dahl,1 such scholarship shifts
focus away from hypothetical contract devices and ideal theory. Many prominent scholars
of political theory (Blau, 2017; Carens, 2004; Dowding, 2020; Floyd, 2017, 2019; Miller,
2013; Shapiro, 2002; Waldron, 2016; and others) insist that political theorists study actual
political institutions and behaviour – political parties, electoral systems, taxation systems
– rather than various theoretical constructs.
This empirical turn does not mean that political theory submerges itself wholly into the
social sciences: it maintains an evaluative, normative perspective. The goal of carefully
Department of Political Studies, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
Corresponding author:
Nahshon Perez, Department of Political Studies, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel.
Email: nahshonp@gmail.com
1113218BPI0010.1177/13691481221113218The British Journal of Politics and International RelationsPerez
research-article2022
Original Article
618 The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 25(4)
investigating the ways that a given political institution functions is to evaluate its desira-
bility. This explicit evaluative function distinguishes the new empirically grounded politi-
cal theory from the more descriptive, causal work of social science.
The empirical political theory school of thought (EPT, used here as a convenient ‘nick-
name’) demonstrates significant interest in political institutions and behaviour. This inter-
est is shared with political science, and as is well known, political scientists already have
developed rich and diverse methodologies for studying political institutions and political
behaviour. A natural question arises: what can empirical political theorists borrow from
this literature that would advance their efforts to evaluate political institutions and behav-
iour precisely?
As the methodological literature in political science is large, this article proposes an
initial step in gradually answering this question by pointing to three political science
methods that can be adopted by empirical political theorists: the study and usage of case
studies, avoiding sampling by the dependent variable, and process tracing.2 These three
methods constitute a suitable starting point for three reasons: first, they are widely appli-
cable and commonly used in political science; second, the potential impact of these meth-
ods – challenging, changing, qualifying, improving or validating well-known studies in
contemporary political theory – can be demonstrated clearly; third, they are compatible
with the small N research that political theorists frequently use. As such, these three meth-
ods do not require technical expertise of statistical methods likely to be foreign to the
typical political theorist. Put differently, these methods are accessible and relevant to
common research in political theory.
In order to demonstrate the usefulness of these imported political science methods,
this article re-engages the following well-known contemporary political theory studies3:
J. Spinner-Halev’s (2001) case study of Shah-Bano used to critically examine M.
Nussbaum’s (1999) view of gender equality; Walzer’s (1987) the Company of Critics,
which samples cases exclusively following an invariant dependent variable; and Wenar’s
(2015) implicit usage of process tracing to support his proposed rules of international
trade in natural resources. These demonstrations – pointing to two flawed (Spinner-
Halev and Walzer) and one generally successful (Wenar) implementations – show the
usefulness and necessity of naturalising political science methods within EPT.
The article will be divided into three parts. ‘The empirical turn in contemporary politi-
cal theory’ section describes the attributes of the new EPT. The section ‘EPT and political
science methods: Suggestive naturalisation’ explores the value of ‘naturalising’ political
science methods within EPT, and presents three methods chosen for initial consideration:
case studies, avoiding sampling by the dependent variable and the adequate usage of
process tracing in small N research. The ‘Political theory and political science methods:
An exemplification’ section demonstrates the usefulness of the political science methods
presented in section ‘EPT and political science methods: Suggestive naturalisation’ by
using them to analyse the three noted studies in contemporary political theory (Spinner-
Halev, Walzer and Wenar).
A final preliminary point: the goal of this work is not to point to the shortcomings or
the merits of the research of Walzer, Spinner-Halev, and Wenar. All three are important
scholars who made valuable contributions to the field of political theory. Rather, the goal
is to demonstrate the importance of systematically considering research methods once
political theorists enthusiastically move to make the study of actual political institutions
central to their scholarly mission.4
To continue reading
Request your trial