52 The Nature of Political Theorythe rubric of ‘political science’, this latter term will also be briefly clarified. Third, the
discussion will shift to an examination of the behavioural movement, which contains
the most optimistic formulation of empirical political theory. This will also entail
a cursory discussion of the idea of positivism. Fourth, the decline of the empirical
approach, or, at least, the decline of its imperial ambitions, will be considered in
the light of critical responses and the development of ‘post-behaviouralism’. In this
context, there will be a succinct discussion of the after shocks of empirical theory on
political theory. The main after shock is rational choice theory.
The shape of empirical theory in the 1950s was premised largely on a rejection of
both institutional state theory, historical and traditional normative theory—except
where they could be shown to contain an empirically-verifiable content. Institutional
state theory was seen to be hidebound by its formal attachment to institutions and
the historical comparative method. The task was to consider informal behaviour.
The state also was seen, by many empirical theorists, as too vague and imprecise
a concept. Further, the bulk of classical political theory was considered a body of
highly questionable unverifiable assumptions. The only viable substance to classical
theory was a very limited range of testable hypotheses. The history of this body of
questionable assumptions was therefore considered as innocuous antiquarianism.
At this point, as mentioned, there was a strong suggestion that political sciencewas
political theory, in the sense that all the traditional senses of the term ‘political theory’
had been vacated. This perspective on political theory, particularly in America, had a
strong grip until the late 1960s, when it came under criticism. However, one should
not imagine by any means that the issues were resolved. They merely faded from
discussion and could well arise again.
Second, giventheclosecorrelationbetweenempiricaltheoryandpoliticalscience, it
is important to get some purchase on the development of the idea of ‘political science’
itself. There are three uses of the term ‘political science’, which were all prevalent
during the late nineteenth century. The first, and original use dates back to late
eighteenth century thinkers, such as Montesquieu, Condorcet, Adam Smith, Adam
Ferguson, and David Hume, where it was usually understood as the ‘science of the
legislator’. The Scottish Enlightenment thinkers were particularly significant here. In
fact, other areas, like political economy, were frequently viewed as a subset of political
science. Adam Smith, for example, in hisWealth of Nations, described ‘political
economy’ as a ‘branch of the science of a statesman or legislator’ (Smith 1979: 428).
Therewasthereforelittleornodemarcationofwhatmightnowberegardedasseparate
disciplines. Smith’sWealth of Nationsblends political economy, moral philosophy,
political theory, and history as part of a unified enterprise. The term ‘political science’
was picked up by North American commentators, from the vocabulary of the Scottish
Enlightenment, and used in debates over the new Constitution and Republic.^34
Political science was also linked to a more general demand for ‘social science’. One
major intellectual input into this process was the Enlightenment itself. It is problem-
atic to generalize about the Enlightenment, given its very differing manifestations
across Europe and North America (see Haakonssen 1995; Schmidt 2000). Minimally,
though, many Enlightenment thinkers were making an effort to grasp human affairs