Philosophical Pitfalls: The Methods Debate in American Political Science

Journal of Integrated Social Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 1, pg. 141-176, 2009.

Nivien Saleh

Positivism dominates research in U.S. political science. I will show that even though
critical realism is virtually unknown in the discipline, realist concepts have found their
way into debates among qualitative methodologists. The analysis begins with a
juxtaposition of positivist and realist foundations. Next, I will trace the methodology
debate that has unfolded in the U.S., examining in what ways it reflects these
foundational assumptions. Over the last number of years, I demonstrate, qualitative
methodologists have engaged in philosophical hybridity, because they have drawn on
realist concepts while continuing to adhere to an empiricist ontology. This kind of cherry-
picking is a perilous strategy, and I suggest that methodologists examine their ontological
assumptions, especially their views on causation. To do so, they need to engage critical
realism. This exercise would benefit political science, because it would provide scholars
with exciting new research possibilities. Moreover, critical realism is well-suited to
support the discipline’s central quest: gaining insight into the world by using few
examined cases to draw inferences to larger sets of unexamined cases.

Read the article.