Clearly, as Deutsch (1963) points out, models are not in them-
selves right or wrong, merely, helpful or unhelpful. Choice of models
will depend on their relevance, economy and predictive power – the
latter encompassing ideas of rigour (do theories based upon it give
unique answers?), combinatorial richness (the number of patterns
that can be generated from it) and organising power (can a model be
applied in many different circumstances?).
Really successful models can be at the heart of what Kuhn (1970)
terms a scientific paradigm. Thus the Newtonian model of matter as a
series of particles whose relationships could be described in terms of a
series of simple mathematical equations dominated physics for
several centuries. Evolutionary development proposed by Darwin
continues as the dominant paradigm in modern biology. Despite the
positivist view of scientific development referred to above, Kuhn
argues that most scientific endeavour (‘normal science’) consists in
the further application of existing models to new areas, or the
explanation of apparent deviations from the dominant model in terms
derived from it. Nor should this be despised; a great deal of modern
technological and scientific progress has rested upon this process
of ‘pygmies standing on the shoulders of giants’ – ordinary know-
ledge workers amassing detailed information within the dominant
paradigm.
In these terms, political studies can be seen as an academic dis-
cipline in the pre-scientific stage in which no dominant paradigm has
yet emerged. What are described here as ‘schools’ can be seen as
aspirant paradigms. The main question that has to be asked is how
useful a source they are of models applicable to new situations, of
testable hypotheses and of concepts for helpfully describing and
analysing events. Absolute truths cannot be found.
Radical and postmodernist criticism
One characteristic of a scientific theory is that it should be value-free
- there is no left-wing physics and right-wing physics, just good
physics and bad physics. It is not that ‘ideological’ (see section on
Ideology in Chapter 4) distortions are impossible or unlikely –
theological and political considerations have hindered the acceptance
of the Darwinian paradigm in biology for instance. But, in the long
term, the insistence on observational, statistical, and above all
POLITICS 19