This article attempts to highlight the logical fabric of comparison in comparative politics. The framework encompassing various views on the nature of comparison includes epistemological notions that underlie comparative analysis such as the contexts of discovery and justification in science, as well as the role of logic within these contexts. These various views on the nature of comparison range from (1) the MSSD (Most Similar Systems Design) to (2) the MDSD (Most Different Systems Design); (3) the possibility of mirror-imagng these designs; (4) the notion that comparison is such an intrinsic part of science that it cannot deserve special status; (5) the notion that comparison is of such divergent nature that it cannot be classified; and (6) the view that comparison should be regarded as a debate over the strategic employment of scientific method. In closing, a general conclusion on the locus and role of methodology in comparative politics is offered.
Bartolini, S.
(1993) `On Time and Comparative Research', Journal of Theoretical Politics5(2): 131-167.
2.
Benjamin, R. W.
(1977) `Strategy versus Methodology in Comparative Research', Comparative Political Studies9(4): 475-484.
3.
Blalock, H. M.
(1969) Theory Construction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4.
Braithwaite, R. B.
(1955) Scientific Explanation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.
Freeman, E. A.
(1873) Comparative Politics. London: Macmillan.
6.
Goldberg, S.
(1968) `Political Science as Science', in R. A. Dahl and D. E. Neubauer (eds) Readings in Modern Political Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
7.
Golembiewski, R. T.
, W. A. Welsh and W. J. Crotty (1969) Methodological Primer for Political Scientists. Chicago: Rand McNally.
8.
Graham, G.
(1971) Methodological Foundations for Political Analysis. Waltham, MA: Xerox College Publishing.
9.
Hanson, N. R.
, (1958) `The Logic of Discovery', Journal of PhilosophyLV(25): 1073-1089.
10.
Hanson, N. R.
(1959) Patterns of Discovery. Cambridge MA: Havard University Press.
11.
Hanson, N. R.
(1960) `More on “The Logic of Discovery” ', Journal of PhilosophyLVII(6): 182-188.
12.
Hanson, N. R.
(1970) `Is there a Logic of Scientific Discovery?', in B. A. Brody (ed.) Readings in the Philosophy of Science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
13.
Holt, R. T.
and Turner, J. E. (1970) `The Methodology of Comparative Research', in R. T. Holt and J. E. Turner (eds) The Methodology of Comparative Research. New York: The Free Press.
14.
Kaplan, A.
(1964) The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science. San Francisco: Chandler.
15.
Kuhn, T. S.
(1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
16.
Lakatos, I.
and Musgrave, A. (1970) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
Lewis, O.
(1961) `Comparisons in Cultural Anthropology', in F. W. Moore (ed.) Readings in Cross Cultural Methodology. New Haven, CT: Human Relations Area Files.
18.
Lijphart, A.
(1971) `Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method', The American Political Science Review65(3): 682-693.
19.
Lijphart, A.
(1975) `The Comparable Cases Strategy in Comparative Research', Comparative Political Studies8(2): 158-177.
20.
Lijphart, A. (1977) Personal communication, letter, 28 December.
21.
Meckstroth, T. W.
(1975) ` “Most Different Systems” and “Most Similar Systems”: A Study in the Logic of Comparative Inquiry', Comparative Political Studies8(2).
22.
Meehan, E. J.
(1965) The Theory and Method of Political Analysis. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.
23.
Mill, J. S.
(1843/1970) A System of Logic. London: Longman.
24.
Nagel, E.
(1971) The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
25.
Popper, K. R.
(1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson.
26.
Popper K. R.
(1970) `Normal Science and its Dangers', in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Popper, K. R.
(1974) Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
28.
Przeworski, A.
and Teune, H. (1970) The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: John Wiley.
29.
Rasmussen, J.
(1972) ` “Once You've Made a Revolution, Everything's the Same”: Comparative Politics', in G. J. Graham and G. W. Carey (eds) The Post-behavioral Era: Perspectives on Political Science. New York: David McKay.
30.
Reichenbach, H.
(1938) Experience and Prediction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
31.
Richter, M.
(1969) `Comparative Political Analysis in Montesquieu and Tocqueville', Comparative Politics1(2): 129-160.
32.
Rudner, R. S.
(1966) Philosophy of Social Science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
33.
Sartori, G.
(1973) `Faulty Concepts', in P. G. Lewis and D. C. Potter (eds) The Practice of Comparative Politics. London: Longman/Open University Press.
34.
Scarrow, H. A.
(1969) Comparative Political Analysis: An Introduction. New York: Harper & Row.
35.
Smelser, N. J.
(1973) `The Methodology of Comparative Analysis', in D. P. Warwick and S. Osherson (eds) Comparative Research Methods. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
36.
Stretton, H.
(1969) Political Sciences: General Principles of Selection in Social Science and History. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
37.
Teune, H.
(1975) `Comparative Research, Experimental Design and the Comparative Method', Comparative Political Studies8(2): 195-199.
