A Perestroikan Straw Man Answers Back: David Laitin and Phronetic Political Science
Politics & Society, 2004, vol. 32, issue 3, 389-416
This article addresses three main issues. First, it argues that David Laitin, in a misguided critique of Bent Flyvbjergâ€™s book Making Social Science Matter for being a surrogate manifesto for Perestroika, misrepresents the book in the extreme. Second, the article argues that Laitinâ€™s claim that political science may become normal, predictive science in the natural science sense is unfounded; the claim is a dead end that perestroikans try to get beyond. Finally, the article proposes that political scientists substitute phronesis for episteme and thereby avoid the trap of emulating natural science. By doing so, political scientists may arrive at social science that is strong where natural science is weak: in the reflexive analysis and discussion of values and interests aimed at praxis, which is the prerequisite for an enlightened political, economic, and cultural development in any society.
Keywords: phronesis; Perestroika; David Laitin; philosophy of social science; context; judgment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:polsoc:v:32:y:2004:i:3:p:389-416
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in Politics & Society
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().