A standard problem in empirical inquiry is how to adjudicate between contending theories when they work from different fundamental assumptions. In the field of political sociology, several strategies are adopted, from metatheoretical and comparative historical approaches to the recent formal models of scientific growth proposed by Imre Lakatos and Larry Laudan. After considering the limitations of these approaches, I develop an alternative strategy—"second—order empiricism"—based on the idea that successor theories have an onus to explain the apparent success of their rivals, not only their own and their rivals' anomalies. Such a strategy, I argue, underscores some of the most effective analysis and argument in political sociology, yet is obscured by the appeal to other methodologies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alford, R.R., and R. Friedland.1985. Powers of theory: Capitalism, the state, and democracy.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Bollen, K.A.1979. Political democracy and the timing of developmentAmerican Sociological Review44:572-87.
3.
Boyd, R.1973. Realism, underdetermination, and a causal theory of evidenceNous7:1-12.
4.
Bueno de Mesquita, B.1981. The war trap.New Haven, CT : Yale University Press.
5.
—. 1984. A critique of A critique of the war trap.Journal of Conflict Resolution28:341-60.
6.
Burawoy, M.1989. Two methods in search of scienceTheory and Society18:759-805.
7.
—. 1990. Marxism as science: Historical challenges and theoretical growthAmerican Sociological Review55:775-93.
8.
Cohen, R., P. Feyerabend, and M. Wartofsky, eds. 1976. Essays in memory of Imre Lakatos.Dordrecht and Boston: D. ReideL
9.
Cutright, P.1963. National political development: Measurement and analysisAmerican Sociological Review28:253-64.
10.
Day, T., and H. Kincaid.1994. Putting inference to the best explanation in its placeSynthese98:271-95.
11.
Diamond, L.1989. Introduction: Persistence, erosion, breakdown, and renewal . In Democracy in developing countries: Asia , edited by L. Diamond, J. J. Linz, and S. M. Lipset. Boulder, CO : Lynne Reinner.
12.
Evans, P. B., D. Rueschemeyer, and T. Skocpol, eds. 1985. Bringing the state back in.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Feyerabend, P.K.1978. Against method.New York : Verso.
14.
Finegold, K. and T. Skocpol.1984. State, party, and industry: From business recovery to the Wagner Act in America's New Deal In Statemaking and social movements, edited by C. Bright and S. Harding. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
15.
Evans, P. E., D. Rueschemeyer, and T. Skocpol, eds. 1985. Bringing the state back in.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
Gallie, W.B.1956. Essentially contested conceptsProceedings of the Aristotelian Society56:167-98.
17.
Goldfield, M.1989. Worker insurgency, radical organization, and New Deal labor legislation. American Political Science Review83:1257-82.
18.
Goodman, N.1955. Fact, fiction and forecastIndianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
19.
Grünbaum, A.1976. Can a theory answer more questions than one of its rivals?British Journal for the Philosophy of Science27:1-23.
20.
Hausman, D.1992. The inexact and separate science of economics.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
Hesse, M.1974. The structure of scientific inference.London: Macmillan.
22.
Howson, C.1984. Bayesianism and support by novel factsBritish Journal for the Philosophy of Science35:245-51.
23.
Howson, C., and P. Urbach.1989. Scientific reasoning: The Bayesian approachLa Salle, IL: Open Court.
24.
Hull, D.L., et al.1979. Review symposium on Laudan's Progress and its problems.Philosophy of the Social Sciences9:457-97.
25.
Jarvie, I.C.1979. Laudan's problematic progress and the social sciencesPhilosophy of the Social Sciences9:484-97.
26.
Kiser, E., and M. Hechter.1991. The role of general theory in comparative historical sociologyAmerican Journal of Sociology97:1-30.
27.
Kitcher, R, and W. C. Salmon, eds. 1989. Scientific explanation. Vol.13 of Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
28.
Kuhn, T.S.1970. The structure of scientific revolutions.2ded., enl. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29.
Lakatos, I.1978. Philosophical papers. 2 vols., edited by J. Worrall and G. Currie. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
30.
Latsis, S.1976. Method and appraisal in economics.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
31.
Laudan, L.1976. Two dogmas of methodology. Philosophy of Science43:585-97.
32.
—. 1977. Progress and its problems: Towards a theory of scientific growth.London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
33.
—. 1984. Science and values: The aims of science and their role in scientific debate.Berkeley: University of California Press.
34.
Lehman, E.W.1988. The theory of the state versus the state of theoryAmerican Sociological Review53:807-23.
35.
Lipset, S.M.1959. Some social requisites of democracy: Economic development and political legitimacy. American Political Science Review53:69-105.
36.
(Reprinted in S.M. Lipset, Political man. Exp. edn. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980.)
37.
—. 1960. Political man.Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
38.
Lugg, A.1979. Laudan and the problem-solving approach to scientific progress and rationalityPhilosophy of the Social Sciences9:466-74.
39.
Mill, J.S.1890. A system of logic.8thed. New York: Harper.
40.
Moore, B., Jr.1966. Social origins of dictatorship and democracy: Lord and peasant in the making of the modern world.Boston : Beacon.
41.
Murphy, N.1989. Another look at novel factsStudies in History and Philosophy of Science20:385-88.
42.
Popper, K.R.1959. The logic of scientific discovery.London: Hutchinson.
43.
—. 1963. Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge.New York: Basic Books.
44.
Putnam, H.1978. Meaning and the moral sciencesLondon: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
45.
Quadagno, J., and S.J. Knapp.1992. Have historical sociologists forsaken theory? Thoughts on the history/theory relationshipSociological Methods and Research20:481-507.
46.
Ragin, C.C.1987. The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies.Berkeley : University of California Press.
47.
Ritzer, G.1991. Metatheorizing in sociology.Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
48.
Rosenberg, A.1992. Economics—Mathematical politics or science of diminishing returns?Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
49.
Rueschemeyer, D., E.H. Stephens, and J.D. Stephens.1992. Capitalist development and democracy.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
50.
Sellars, W.1963. Science, perception and reality.London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
51.
Simowitz, R., and B.L. Price.1990. The expected utility theory of conflict: measuring theoretical progress. American Political Science Review84:439-60.
52.
Skocpol, T.1979. States and social revolutions.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
—. 1984. Emerging agendas and recurrent strategies in historical sociology. In Vision and method in historical sociology, edited by T. Skocpol. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54.
Sober, E.1988. Reconstructing the past: Parsimony, evolution and inference.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
55.
Taylor, S.1984. Social science and revolutions.New York: St. Martin's.
56.
Trotsky, L. [1933] 1977. The history of the Russian Revolution.London: Pluto.
57.
Watkins, J.1978. Corroboration and the problem of content-comparison . In Progress and rationality in science, edited by G. Radnitzky and A. Andersson. Dordrecht: Reidel.
58.
—. 1984. Science and scepticism.London : Hutchinson.
59.
Weiner, M.1987. Empirical democratic theory. In Competitive elections in developing countries, edited by M. Weiner and E. Ozbudun. Washington: American Enterprise Institute.
60.
Weintraub, E.R.1985. General equilibrium analysis: Studies in appraisal . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
61.
Weir, M., and T. Skocpol.1985. State structures and the possibilities for "Keynesian" responses to the Great Depression in Sweden, Britain, and the United States In Bringing the state back in, edited by P. B. Evans, D. Rueschemeyer, and T. Skocpol. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
62.
Znaniecki, F.1934. The method of sociology.New York: Farrar and Rinehart.
63.
Zunz, O.1987. Toward a dialogue with historical sociologySocial Science History11:31-41.
