PROJECT WORK

OF

POLITICAL SCIENCE

TOPIC: POST-BEHAVIOURAISM

SUBMITTED BY: Syed Renoba Nisar

Reg. no.: GU17R0389

Semester: 5th

SUBMITTED TO: Asst. Prof. Aamir Mahmood.

GLOCAL LAW SCHOOL

1|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION
2. CHARACTERISTICS OR FEATURES OF POST-BEHAVIOURALISM
3. CAUSES FOR GROWTH OF POST-BEHAVIOURALISM
4. POST-BEHAVIOURALISM ACCEPTED AND ADVOCATED
5. FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO EMERGENCE
6. CONCLUSION

2|Page
3|Page
 INTRODUCTION

POST-BEHAVIOURALISM

Post-behaviouralism is a protest movement against Behaviouralism which emerged with some of

the Behaviourailsts like David Easton who was originally one of the leading advocates of
behavioural revolution. According to the advocates of the Post Behaviouralism, the
Behaviourailsts instead of studying political problems of the society began to waste their time in
developing tools and techniques and on such concepts as value free investigation of political
problems. They also felt that the Behaviourailsts were doing irrelevant research not touching
problems of social change, and even of revolution. So, along with David Easton, some
Behaviourailsts announced a new revolution in 1969 popularly known as Post Behaviouralism
Revolution that represented a shift of focus from strict methodological issues to a greater concern
with public responsibilities. Now a question arises whether post Behaviouralism was a reform
movement or another revolution in Political Science. But the advocates of Post Behaviouralism
like David Easton, Austin Ranney, Peter H. Markel announced that Post-Behaviouralism is a
new revolution but not Anti-Behaviouralism because Post Behaviouralism are not opposing
Behaviourailsts but are adding to what is already being propagated, with certain modifications.
Post Behaviouralism tried to remove the drawbacks of the Behaviourailsts which had came to
light in actual conduct of their research, which was different from the objectives with which it
started.

David Easton, who had earlier laid down the intellectual foundation of behavioural revolution
has also,put forward new traits and orientation of the Post-Behavioural revolution. The seven
principles of Post Behaviouralism as laid down by David Easton can be summarized as follows:
Importance of Substance: The Behaviourailsts had puts a lot of emphasis on the development of
sophisticated tools, techniques and methods. Post Behaviourailsts did not under estimate their
importance but at the same time they made it clear that these should have much less importance
than the substance which must have precedence over techniques. Tools should be used for a
purpose. They believed that unless research was purposeful and meaningful for solving urgent
social and political problems, there was no use of undertaking that. For them it was always
important to be relevant and meaningful than to be sophisticated in the tools of investigation. For
them it is always better to be vague than non -relevantly precise.
4|Page
Importance of Substance: Post Behaviourailsts did not under estimate the importance of tools
and methods but at the same time they made it clear that these should have much less importance
than the substance. Tools should be used for a purpose.

1. Stress on Social Change: The Post-Behaviourailsts condemned Behaviourailsts trying to

preserve social order which was bound to hamper the understanding of facts in the
broadest sense. They wanted that stress of contemporary political science should be on
social change and not on social preservation.
2. Emphasis on Reality: The Behaviourailsts had lost touch with realities and kept away
from brute realities of politics. Post-Behaviourailsts want that barriers of silence which
behavioural language has created should be ended and realities of life situation accepted
and problems of life solved.
3. Stress on Value Loaded Political Science: Post-Behaviourailsts however, did not agree
with this viewpoint and stressed on value loaded political Science. According to them all
knowledge stands on values and that unless value is considered as the basis of knowledge
there is every danger that knowledge will become purposeless.
4. Stress on Human Values: Post-Behaviourailsts are of the opinion that as learned
scholars’ political scientists falls under the category of intellectuals and as such it
becomes their most important duty to protect human values civilization. Stress on Action
Science: Post-Behaviourailsts puts a lot of emphasis on action rather than on
contemplative science.
5. Stress on Politicization of Profession: The Behaviourailsts were not in favour of
politicization of political science but Post-Behaviourailsts hold the opposite view.
According to the post Behaviourailsts, to achieve the goals mentioned above there was a
growing need for politicization of profession of all professional associations and
institutions.

5|Page
Characteristics or Features of Post-Behaviouralism:

The Behaviourailsts had lost touch with realities and kept away from brute realities of politics.
Post Behaviourailsts felt that behavioural enquiry is abstractism and does not help the society in
any way. They point out that we are passing through times of crisis and in spite of the fact that
heavy expanses on research had been incurred and all the comforts of life are available in
western world yet it is full of worries and social conflicts are deepening in that part of the world.
In simple sense, Post Behaviouralism is a protest movement against Behaviouralism which
emerged with some of the Behaviourailsts like David Easton who was originally one of the
leading advocates of behavioural revolution. According to the advocates of the Post
Behaviouralism, the Behaviourailsts instead of studying political problems of the society began
to waste their time in developing tools and techniques and on such concepts as value free
investigation of political problems. They also felt that the Behaviourailsts were doing irrelevant
research not touching problems of social change, and even of revolution. So, along with David
Easton, some Behaviourailsts announced a new revolution in 1969 popularly known as Post
Behaviouralism Revolution that represented a shift of focus from strict methodological issues to
a greater concern with public responsibilities. Now a question arises whether post
Behaviouralism was a reform movement or another revolution in Political Science. But the
advocates of Post Behaviouralism like David Easton, Austin Ranney, Peter H. Markel announced
that Post Behaviouralism is a new revolution but not Anti Behaviouralism because Post
Behaviouralism are not opposing Behaviourailsts but are adding to what is already being
propagated, with certain modifications. David Easton therefore appealed to Behaviourailsts and
all political scientists that they should welcome it and takes initiatives by calling for the
establishment of a federation of a social scientists which should identify major political issues,
evaluate the viewpoint of others as well as actions suggested by them and come out with
alternative suggestions and solutions. Peter H. Merkel is of the view that though there has been
criticism against Behaviouralism, yet Post-Behaviouralism doesn’t constitute a new wave of
methodological innovations but in it there is trend to study political science on normative lines,
which has been condemned by the Behaviourailsts. The post-behaviouralists are deadly opposed
to the attempts of the behaviouralists in making Political Science as value-free science. David

6|Page
Easton observes: "Research about and constructive development of values were inextinguishable
part of the study of politics. Science cannot be and never has been evaluating neutral despite
protestations to the contrary. Hence, to understanding the limits of our knowledge we need to be
aware of the value premises on which it stands and alternatives for which this knowledge could
be used". The critics asserted that the behaviouralists who boasted of their relevance to the actual
political problems have themselves cut off from the realities of life and are following academic
detachment. David Easton asserted that role of the intellectuals has been and must be to protect
human values of civilization. Therefore the behaviouralists should concentrate on it but they
have utterly failed to realize this goal. Dwight Waldo has also asserted: "political scientists
should be more concerned with values, with issues of justice, freedom, equality with political
activity. In a period of stress, turmoil and gross inequalities, it is irresponsible to carry on as
usual in academic, detachment. At minimum, political scientist-need to be concerned with issues
of public policy and political reform". Therefore the post-behaviouralists assert that the Political
Science must be relevant to society and it must deliberate over such basic issues of society such
as justice, liberty, equality, democracy etc. It must be remembered that the post-behaviouralism
is not confined to a particular section of society. It is a sort of intellectual movement and its
followers can be found amongst all sections of the society," in all generations from young
graduates to old members of the profession". Post behaviouralism is thus both a movement and
intellectual tendency. Though the post-behaviouralists prefer the behavioural approach than the
traditional approach because it is empirical yet they want to link their methods of research in
making such theories which may be able to solve the present and future problems of the society.
In other words they want to make the methods and technology of the behaviouralists related to
the future well-being in society. "Although the post-behavioural revolution may have all the
appearances of just another reaction to behaviouralists, it is in fact notably different
Behaviouralism was viewed as a threat to status quo, classicism and traditionalism. The post-
behavioural revolution is, however, future-oriented. It does not seek to return to some golden age
of political research or to conserve or even to destroy a particular methodological approach. It
seeks rather to probe Political Science in new direction". David Easton who once described eight
main characteristics of behaviouralism and called them the "intellectual foundation stones" of the
movement, now come out with seven major traits of post-behaviouralism and described them as
the "Credo of Relevance" or a "distillation of the maximal image".

7|Page
Causes for the Growth of Post-Behaviouralism:1

1. Failure of behaviouralism to look to the practical problems of the world:

While behaviouralism was a movement against traditionalism, the post- behaviouralism was also
a movement against behaviouralism itself but instead of condemning either of the two methods
of thought, it was a synthesis between the two contending schools of thought. Behaviouralism
was not a new discipline; rather it was just a new technique, a new approach, with a new focus in
view for the study of political science.

The traditional approaches such as philosophical, historical and institutional did not worry about
human behaviour or group-behaviour and neglected the scientific analysis of the human
problems. Therefore the people, first of all welcomed found that it failed to solve any problem of
the world such as threat of nuclear war, hunger, poverty, disease etc. Therefore post-
behaviouralism rose against it.

2. David Easton on the failure of behaviouralism:

David Easton, one of the founders of the behaviouralist school of thought got disillusioned with
behaviouralism which dominated Political Science from the middle of fifties upto the close of
sixties. In his presidential address to the Annual Convention of the American Political Science
Association held in 1969, Easton declared that “he felt dissatisfied with the political research and
teaching made under the impact of behaviouralism.

The behavioural approach was trying to convert the study of politics into a discipline based on
the methodology of natural sciences. Mathematics was making its way in political science to the
extent that it began to look more of mathematics than a science related to the realities of social
life. In their efforts at research and application of scientific methods, the behaviouralists had
gone for away from the realities of social behaviour. In this way political science again lost touch
with the current and contemporary world”.

1
www.preservearticles.com/political-science

8|Page
 3. Over-emphasis of the Behaviouralists on research methods and tools:
Behaviouralism was anxious to develop new research methods and techniques about political
phenomena so that in political science also theories may be developed like natural science but in
their efforts they divorced political science from philosophy, history and law.

With the advance of time, the behaviouralists lost touch with the realities of life altogether.
Consequently, Right-thinking behaviouralists like David Easton found that they had been
wasting their precious time only in developing methodological techniques and in refining their
research tools.

4. Dissatisfaction with behaviouralism led to the growth of post- behaviouralism:

The people soon got fed up with behaviouralism which failed to solve any practical problem of
the world even after spending crores of rupees on research in regard to developing new
methodology and techniques. Therefore post- behaviouralism arose as a protest-movement
against behaviouralism.

5. Failure of the behaviouralists to convert Political Science into a problem solving science:
The behaviouralists devoted themselves in building up various paradigms, conceptual frame
works, models, theories and metatheories and spent huge amount and precious time but did little
thing to solve social, political, economic and cultural crisis of the world.

The post-behaviouralists asked what was the use of the research of the behaviouralists when they
did not take into account acute social maladies and the growing dangers of nuclear and thermo-
nuclear war. They contended that there was absolutely no use of developing high technical
adequacy and sophisticated research tools if the political scientists was unable to understand
contemporary social and political problems.

Post-Behaviouralism accepted and advocated:2

2
www.shareyouressays.com/knowledge/post-behaviouralism.

9|Page
1. The need to study all realities of Politics.

2. The need to study social change.

3. The need to end the obsession with methods and techniques and the need to study the
substance of politics.

4. The need to admit the study of values along with facts.

5. The need to help the society to develop by the use of knowledge of politics.

6. The need to put knowledge of politics into action by the political scientists.

7. The need to serve the society by helping it to preserve and develop its values.

Post-Behaviouralists now advocated ‘Relevance’ and ‘Action’ as two guiding goals and accepted
the need for the study of values in Politics.

Relevance meant study of all the realities, brute realities of politics. Mere development of
techniques and methods was not enough. Political Science must give primary importance to the
study of the social realities and social change. It should not be conservative and static in
approach and efforts.

Action meant the responsibility of the political scientists to act in the political process. It stood
for the use of knowledge and understanding of politics for helping the society to develop by
adopting the valued reforms.

The Post-Behaviouralists accepted the responsibility of getting involved in the process of social
change through social action. Total concentration on the development of techniques and methods
for building a scientific theory of politics was held to be inadequate. It was to be supplemented
by willing and purposive involvement in social action for social change.

The transformation of the Behavioural Approach into Post-Behaviouralism increased the

acceptability of this approach. The advocates of traditional approach now came forward to accept

10 | P a g e
the importance and need of empirical-scientific methods of study and the behavioural view of
politics.

The Behaviouralists turned Post-behaviouralists also came forward to accept the importance of
the study of values in politics as well as some merit of the traditional normative approach.
Normativism and Empiricism came closer and the subject-matter of Political Science came to
include both traditional as well as modern features.

The attempt to develop an integrated theory of politics—an Empirical-Normative theory of

politics got initiated. This attempt is still being made by the modern political scientists.

Modern Political scientists have been using both empirical-scientific approaches like, Systems
Approached, Structural Functional Approach, Communication Approach, Decision-making
Approach, Game Approach as well as Political Economy Approach, Political Sociology
Approach.

It also accepted value of Philosophical, Historical and Legal- Institutional Approaches for
studying some dimensions of politics. Several of them also depend upon the Marxist Approach
which is a sociological approach to the study of politics. Out of all modern approaches, the
Systems Approach has been the most popular approach.

FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO EMERGENCE:

11 | P a g e
 1. Several factors have contributed to the emergence of post-behaviouralism and one such
factor is the change in interest of behaviouralists. Easton, in his article has said that, like
the behaviouralists, the post-behaviouralists also took active interests in voting behaviour
of individuals, formation of political opinion, activities of legislature and judiciary etc.
But the range of interests expanded several times in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

In the sixties and seventies new problems and issues arose in the U.S.A and in other parts of the
globe. The outside issues created clear impact upon politics and economics of the USA. The
behaviouralists could not keep themselves away from all these problems and issues and they
began to respond academically to all these which resulted in the emergence of a new doctrine
known as post- behaviouralism.

Some of the issues are the emergence of Cold War and its collapse, the rise of turbulent situation
in the USA in the wake of Vietnam War, the breakup of former Soviet Union and the formation
of a dozen independent republics in its place, premature collapse of communism in Soviet Union
and eastern European states, revolt of the black people against the whites, emergence of
feminism, rapprochement between USA and Russia. All these political—and to some extent non-
political—issues stirred American internal political condition.

2. The intellect and academic interests of a large number of political scientists were inspired
by the new conditions and many of them were determined to face the situation. Sub-
group and caucus were formed. From the history of the development of behaviouralism
we came to know that American Political Science Association (APSA) took the leading
part in propagating the doctrine of behaviouralism.

In changed circumstances a sizeable section of the APSA readers and organizers fought
vigorously to accommodate themselves to the new situation and they ardently desired to revise
behaviouralism. This group formed a caucus. The caucus clearly announced that the purpose of
political science would be to take steps for the alleviation of poverty and oppression,
improvement of the living condition of common people and help the under-privileged and not to
propagate doctrine or to indoctrinate general public.

12 | P a g e
The behaviouralism failed to achieve this objective and neo-behaviouralists turned their attention
to the above-noted objective. Not only the caucus, a large number of political scientists believed
that political science must have noble objectives without which it cannot survive and flourish at
all.

3. In the first few decades of the twentieth century Marxism made a strident appeal to a
sizeable section of intellectual community and this created a panic in the minds of many
Americans. They were in search of an alternative doctrine which could successfully
combat Marxism.

The most opportune moment appeared with the onset of demise, or temporary collapse of
Marxism in erstwhile Soviet Union and some other countries. Behaviouralism, along with other
liberal political doctrines, were vigorously advocated and that favourable atmosphere provided
potentialities for the blossoming of behaviouralism which came to be known as -post-
behaviouralism.

Easton observes: “With the dissolution of the USSR and the collapse of socialism in Eastern
Europe, the viability of Marxism as a philosophy and analytic approach has come into more
serious question than ever before”.

4. Though Marx and Engels throughout their life stridently advocated for the withering
away of state the implementation of Marxism in Russia taught us a different lesson. In
Russia and some other socialist states the state became so powerful that individuals and
various organizations were forced to be perpetrated at the altar of the state. The
behaviouralists of the seventies strongly felt the need to change it.

5. In the 1970s democracy, in the USA, came to be viewed with a new outlook. The
behaviouralists started their analysis about voters’ behavior and people’s interest on the
issues about which decisions have been taken. But some political scientists began to
analyze democracy in a new way and it is not enough to discuss the issues about which
decisions have been taken.

13 | P a g e
But there are numerous issues on which no decisions have been taken. Even the executive organ
of the government has not taken them seriously. A good and future oriented democracy badly
needs the comprehension of all of them into its fold. There are many problems and issues which
remain outside the purview of authority. The behaviouralists of the 1970s were not apathetic to
them.

For future development of society and solution of peoples problems all of them should be
properly dealt with. This approach changed the whole panorama of democracy, society and the
outlook of political scientists. Docks were cleared for the arrival of a new political doctrine and it
is post-behaviouralism.

6. Counter-cultural movement can be designated as another cause of the rise of post-

behaviouralism. Counter-cultural movement found an important place in political science
and this sizably changed the mood of many. “In one sense” says Easton, “the counter-
cultural movement achieved many of its goals. It brought about fundamental re-
orientations in worldwide perceptions of important issues. Environmental pollution,
poverty, sexual equality, feminist perspectives, freedom in forms of personal dress and
appearance, the new so called style or non-material issues came to the political fore-
ground”.
7. In the 1970s democracy, in the USA, came to be viewed with a new outlook. The
behaviouralists started their analysis about voters’ behavior and people’s interest on the
issues about which decisions have been taken. But some political scientists began to
analyze democracy in a new way and it is not enough to discuss the issues about which
decisions have been taken.

But there are numerous issues on which no decisions have been taken. Even the executive organ
of the government has not taken them seriously. A good and future oriented democracy badly
needs the comprehension of all of them into its fold. There are many problems and issues which
remain outside the purview of authority. The behaviouralists of the 1970s were not apathetic to
them.

14 | P a g e
For future development of society and solution of peoples problems all of them should be
properly dealt with. This approach changed the whole panorama of democracy, society and the
outlook of political scientists. Docks were cleared for the arrival of a new political doctrine and it
is post-behaviouralism.

8. Counter-cultural movement can be designated as another cause of the rise of post-

behaviouralism. Counter-cultural movement found an important place in political science
and this sizably changed the mood of many. “In one sense” says Easton, “the counter-
cultural movement achieved many of its goals. It brought about fundamental
reorientations in worldwide perceptions of important issues. Environmental pollution,
poverty, sexual equality, feminist perspectives, freedom in forms of personal dress and
appearance, the new so called style or non-material issues came to the political
foreground”.
9. The concepts like values, justice, equality, freedom earned new meaning and importance
in the seventies. Adherence to the old dogmas (propounded by behaviouralism) could not
serve any fruitful purpose. Serious political scientists must devote their energy and
intellect to these time-old concepts and their fructification. The political scientists cannot
ignore their responsibility. Values and value judgment, justice, idealism may not
constitute the core of behaviouralism but their disregard may create problems for the
acceptability for a well defined theory.
10. The post-behaviouralists realized from experience that new political concepts or revision
of any political idea must embrace values, ideas and justice. In this way post-
behaviouralism, keeping the tradition of behaviouralism augured a new age and tradition.
At least David Easton believed in that line. He has said that for a future-oriented society
post-behaviouralism is most suitable. Post-behaviouralism can be called a marriage
between basic concepts of behaviouralism based on empiricism and idealism, values and
justice.

15 | P a g e
CONCLUSION:

Post Behaviouralism is one of the important approaches or revolutions to the study of political
science. It is a reform movement of Behaviouralism which appreciates the work done by
Behaviourailsts in developing tools, techniques and methods of research but wish that those
should be used for the good of the society. Post Behaviouralism wants to retain Empirical
Methodology but want to benefit both from the traditional value laden approach and behavioural
empirical approach. It also puts a lot of emphasis on future oriented and action oriented research
and try to change the nature and scope of political science in new directions. Post Behaviourailsts
argues that political scientists should attend to urgent social problems and find out solutions to
contemporary political problems and wish that in the field of social sciences, political scientists
should play a leading role. According to them; political scientists should bring new needed
changes in political and social fields as leader. The approach of political scientists should be
dynamic. If the present crisis in society arose out of deep social conflicts, these conflicts have to
be resolved. If the solution of these conflicts required breaking up of the existing political order,
then the political scientists should make vigorous demand for it. He should not be merely content
with mere suggestions for reforms

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

16 | P a g e
  https://albertsience.com
 http://www.cukashmir.ac.in
 www.shareyouressays.com/knowledge/post-behaviouralism.
 www.preservearticles.com/political-science
 www.google.in

17 | P a g e