Suchergebnisse

To Canadians living in the 1860's, as to Canadians of the 1940's, the world seemed a very dangerous place. In many respects the threats to Canadian survival must have appeared even greater then than now. The American Civil War brought large-scale fighting closer than the present campaigns in Europe or Asia. The Fenian raids, apparently backed by wide American support, looked more ominous than U-boats in the St. Lawrence. The most disastrous international alignment that could ever befall Canadians—a war between the United States and Great Britain—appeared once again imminent. Internally there were equivalent dangers. The constitution of 1841 had broken down in the province of Canada, rendering stable government impossible. Political deadlock had been reached. Though French Canadians were able to enjoy the gratifying spectacle of British Canadians caught in the very constitutional trap—equal representation regardless of population—which had been designed to assure British supremacy, the situation could not continue. The economic outlook was no brighter. Imperial preferences had disappeared with the free trade movement, and though a successful readjustment had been made by the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 this too was about to end. Notice of the cancellation of the Treaty was given by the United States in March, 1865. Thrust out into the economic world first by England, Canadians were rejected a second time by their other mainstay. And when they looked westward for new frontiers, they saw an advancing wave of American settlement, backed by western railways, threatening to engulf the unsettled prairies.

Confusion reigns almost supreme in the field of political science, particularly when the meaning of terms is involved. Some of our most commonly used words have so many meanings, shades of meaning, and connotations that hearers and readers are frequently at a loss as to the meaning and significance of terms used unless the speaker or writer defines them as he uses them. A cursory examination of the term "state" brought to light no fewer than one hundred forty-five different definitions, even though only a few writers were included who might be classed as radical. Less than half of the definitions were in general agreement. Even this statement is based on the assumption that when the same words were used by two writers they were used to mean the same thing; and I doubt whether the assumption is entirely justifiable. Furthermore, "state" is not the only term in political science which is defined in multifold ways. A similar situation was found when others, especially "law," "government," "political," "administration," were investigated.The process of communication between political scientists, as well as between these scientists and laymen or between laymen and laymen, comes to be a guessing game. Consciously or unconsciously, it is suggested, we are spending much of our time guessing what the sender means when he uses even technical words.

A nomenclature is a system of names or signs, or both, used in any field of knowledge. Such systems are of value to scientists in a field if they enable positions to be seen more clearly or distinctions to be drawn more readily.In a recent article, Huntington Cairns says: "There prevails, secondly, confusion with respect to the instrument—linguistics—with which the anthropologist, the jurist, or the social scientist must pursue his investigations and through whose medium he must state his conclusions. … But once the social scientist passes from these simple aspects to the realm of theory, linguistics becomes a problem and it is in his struggle with this problem that he is most envious of the symbolism of the mathematician."1Confusion and uncertainty appear to be present in several sections of political science. Linguistics is a problem for us in theory; in addition, it is a serious one in teaching and in the field of research.When a problem appears in a field of knowledge which handicaps effective work, experiments are in order, not only to analyze the phenomenon itself, but, in addition, to find ways or means by which the causes producing the unfortunate circumstance may be removed, or at least reduced. Can the apparent confusion and uncertainty among political scientists concerning the meaning of terms, labels, or intellectual positions be reduced? This is an important problem which directs our attention to the possibility of developing a nomenclature for political science.