The substance of politics generally attracts more interest among political science students than the methodology of studying it. This study assesses the scientific status of political science as an academic discipline by examining the debate surrounding the core of the field and the establishment of scientific standards within it. The study further identifies existing threats to the scientific endeavor in political science and evaluates the effectiveness of current control mechanisms for combating fraud and deviations by political scientists, alongside an analysis of whether the outcome of political analysis should prioritize explanation or prediction. The study, which adopts a qualitative approach and an explanatory research design, finds that political science is a mature scientific discipline by all standards. However, it is a type of science that does not solely focus on prediction, as seen in the natural sciences. The objective of political science, like other social science disciplines, is to be less wrong over time. The study concludes by affirming the validity of the scientific method as the most rigorous path to knowledge, despite the uncertainties inherent in political science research, and reiterates the need for scholars to uphold ethical standards in conducting political science research.
Cite this paper
Tella, B. A. (2025). Political Science and the Scientific Enterprise. Open Access Library Journal, 12, e14074. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1114074.
Mulkay, M. and Gilbert, G.N. (1981) Putting Philosophy to Work: Karl Popper’s Influence on Scientific Prac-tice. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 11, 389-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/004839318101100306
Kuhn, T. (2021) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. In: Ruse, M., Ed., Philosophy after Darwin, Princeton University Press, 176-177. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1jk0jrs.26
Lieberson, S. and Lynn, F.B. (2002) Barking up the Wrong Branch: Scientific Alternatives to the Current Model of Sociological Science. Annual Re-view of Sociology, 28, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141122
Almond, G.A. (1988) Separate Tables: Schools and Sects in Political Science. PS: Political Science & Politics, 21, 828-842. https://doi.org/10.2307/420022
Monroe, K., Almond, G., Gunnell, J., Shapiro, I., Graham, G., Barber, B., et al. (1990) The Nature of Con-temporary Political Science: A Roundtable Discussion. PS: Political Science & Pol-itics, 23, 34-43. https://doi.org/10.2307/419775
Walton Jr., H., Miller, C.M. and McCormick II, J.P. (1995) Race and Political Science: The Dual Tradi-tions of Race Relations Politics and African-American Politics. In: Dryzek, J.S., Farr, J. and Leonard, S.T., Eds., Political Science in History, Cambridge Universi-ty Press, 145-174.
Mills, C.W. (2008) Racial Liberalism. PMLA/Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 123, 1380-1397. https://doi.org/10.1632/pmla.2008.123.5.1380
Kellstedt, P.M. and Whitten, G.D. (2018) The Fundamentals of Political Science Research. 3rd Edi-tion, Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108131704
Berardo, F.M. (1989) Scien-tific Norms and Research Publication Issues and Professional Ethics. Sociological Inquiry, 59, 249-266. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682x.1989.tb00105.x
Smelser, N.J. (2005) The Questionable Logic of “Mistakes” in the Dynamics of Knowledge Growth in the Social Sciences. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 72, 237-262. https://doi.org/10.1353/sor.2005.0045
