Concept of Post-Behaviouralism in political science

Behaviouralism came as a revolution and like every revolution, it could hold real ground only for a short span of time.

In his presidential address, at the 65^th meeting of the American Political Science Association, held at New York in September, 1969, David Easton himself, one of the leading advocates of Behaviouralism made a powerful attack on the Behavioural position and advocated the need to re-adjust and reform Behaviouralism in the light of past experience and need of the society.

Meaning and Definition of Post-Behaviouralism:

1. Post-Behaviouralism is not a revival of Traditionalism –

According to David Easton, “Post-Behaviouralism is future oriented seeking to propel Political Science in new directions and to add rather than to deny its past heritage. It is a genuine revolution not reaction, a becoming not a preservation, a reform not a counter reform.”

2. Post-Behaviouralism is a Reform Movement within Behaviouralism –

According to David Easton, “the batteries of Post-Behaviouralism are Relevance and Action. It appears to be a specific and important episode in the history of our discipline, if not in all the social sciences. It involves conscious efforts on the part of Behaviouralists turned Post-Behaviouralists to reform their movements.”

Causes for the emergence of Post-Behaviouralism:

The following factors led to the emergence of Post-Behaviouralism: -

1. Failure of Behaviouralists in converting Political Science in a Natural Science –

Behaviouralism’s core goal was to transform political science into a "natural science" by using quantitative methods and focusing on observable behaviour. However, its strict adherence to this model often resulted in a limited understanding of political phenomena. Post-Behaviouralists argued that the complexities of human behaviour and political systems couldn't be fully captured by a methodology borrowed from the natural sciences. The subjective nature of human values, intentions, and political contexts couldn't be ignored in favour of purely objective data.

2. Failure of Behaviouralists in establishing regular norms regarding human behaviour –

Behaviouralism aimed to discover universal laws of human behaviour through empirical research. The hope was to create a predictive science of politics, much like physics or chemistry. However, post-Behaviouralists pointed out that human behaviour is dynamic and context-dependent, making it impossible to establish stable, predictable "laws." The insights gained from behavioural studies often failed to hold true across different cultures, time periods, or political situations.

3. Behaviouralists Ignore the Importance of Values –

A central tenet of Behaviouralism was value-free research, where the scholar was supposed to be a neutral observer, separating their personal values from their scientific work. Post-Behaviouralists, led by David Easton, vehemently criticized this approach. They argued that ignoring values made political science irrelevant. Politics is inherently about values such as justice, equality, and freedom and a discipline that ignores these is failing to address the most crucial aspects of its subject matter. They believed that political scientists had a moral responsibility to use their knowledge to address societal problems and advocate for certain values.

4. Irrelevance and Non-Performance of Behaviouralists –

By focusing so intently on methodological rigor and quantifiable data, Behaviouralism became detached from the pressing social and political issues of the 1960s, such as the Vietnam War, the Civil Rights Movement, and global inequality. Post-Behaviouralists felt that behavioural political scientists were spending too much time on abstract, highly technical research that had no practical relevance. They criticized the ivory tower mentality, arguing that political science should be a force for social change, not just an academic exercise. This criticism was encapsulated in David Easton's famous cry, "relevance and action."

5. Post-Behaviouralism is the Demand of the Era –

The emergence of Post-Behaviouralism was not just an internal academic debate but also a reflection of the tumultuous political climate of the 1960s. The social and political upheavals of the time demanded that political scientists be more engaged and relevant. The younger generation of scholars felt that the behavioural approach was intellectually and morally bankrupt for its inability to provide meaningful solutions to the crises of the day. Post-Behaviouralism was, in essence, a call for political science to reconnect with its normative roots and address the ethical and moral dimensions of politics. It sought to balance the empirical rigor of Behaviouralism with a renewed focus on values and social relevance.

Characteristics of Post-Behaviouralism:

David Easton who had at one stage enumerated 8 characteristics of Behaviouralism and called them intellectual foundation stones of the movement, now came out with 7 major characteristics of Post-Behaviouralism.

He describes these as the credo of relevance.

1. Substance is Important than Technique.

Substance must come before any consideration of tools and techniques. Foremost attention should be paid to the choice of purposeful, relevant and meaningful problems of the society. It is better to be vague than non-relevant, or precise.

2. Emphasis upon Social Change.

Social change, and not preservation of the status quo, should be its motto. Previously, Behaviouralism mostly confined itself to description and analysis of facts, and overlooked broader social context. As such, in many cases, they could not understand the contextual meaning of facts.

3. To Find Out Reliable Solutions of Contemporary Problems and Face Reality.

Scholars should take up social conflicts, deepening fears, and worries about the future as their subjects of study, and try to find out their solutions. They have to face hard realities of politics, and not to run away from them.

4. Values are Part and Parcel of the Study of Politics.

Unlike the past, values should be given a central place and made the basis of choice of problems, research, and evaluation. Scientism, value-neutrality, sophistication, etc., has to be given up. They merely transform the scholars into technicians of Political Science.

5. Major Role of Intellectuals in Protection of Human Values.

The main task of scholars was now to protect and defend human values and seek welfare of the whole world. Failing which they degrade themselves merely to mechanics, technicians and propellers of the mechanical structure of the present society. They should rise above bare Behaviouralism, and labour to defend human values.

6. Political Science is both an Action Science and Contemplative Science.

To know is to bear the responsibility for acting and to act is to engage in reshaping society. In place of sheer contemplation, the scholars must come forward with action to actualise the contents of their knowledge.

7. Politicisation of the Profession is Inescapable and Desirable.

It pleads for the politicisation of the professions. In other words, the intellectuals must discover proper goals for the society and make it move to realise them. They have a positive role to play, and organise themselves to undertake the tasks.

Thus, Post-Behaviouralism intends to transform the academic, professional and valuational contents of Political Science. The latter has to cater both to the social as well as academic needs of society.

Comparison between Traditional, Behavioural, and Post-Behavioural Political Science: