Abstract
1. Professor Rapoport takes issue with all approaches to the study of political behaviour which presuppose a distinction between political science and ethics. He wants to argue that in addition to describing the phenomenon of political behaviour in terms of means-ends relations political scientists must be concerned with evaluating it as a species of moral conduct. Thus while the main substance of his paper consists of describing the ethical dimensions of politicaal behaviour in so far as it offers itself as a candidate for explanation, he appears at the same time to be implying that the very concept of political science as science is logically tied to theevaluation of that behaviour. Before commenting on the implications of his analysis I will first attempt to reconstruct it.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
The Methodology of the Social Sciences, transl. and ed. by E. A. Shils and H. A. Finch, The Free Press of Glencoe, New York, 1949, pp. 52–55.
G. E. G. Catlin, Science and Method of Politics, Archon Books, Hamden, Conn. 1964, pp. 347 - 48.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1979 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rubinoff, L. (1979). The Logic and Metaphysics of Evaluation in Political Theory. In: Johnson, H.J., Leach, J.J., Muehlmann, R.G. (eds) Revolutions, Systems and Theories. Theory and Decision Library, vol 19. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9894-0_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9894-0_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-009-9896-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-9894-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive