Suchergebnisse

▪ Abstract  Although Herbert Simon's work is often cited by political scientists, it has not generated a large research program in the discipline. This is a waste of a major intellectual resource. The main challenge to the rational choice research program—now the most important research program in political science—can be developed by building on Simon's ideas on bounded rationality. The essay defends this assertion by examining how the work of both the early Simon (primarily satisficing-and-search models) and the later Simon (on problem solving) can shed light on important topics in our discipline such as budgeting, turnout, and party competition.

In his classic book, Human Nature in Politics, published in 1908, Graham Wallas said: "We must aim at finding as many relevant and measurable facts about human nature as possible, and we must attempt to make all of them serviceable in political reasoning." While the point of view which Wallas expressed at that time has by no means been universally accepted, and is today challenged by men like Charles A. Beard, certain steps have been taken toward its recognition.Wallas was particularly impressed by the successful use of quantitative methods made by the economists, and well he might be. To mention a single case, the work of F. Y. Edgeworth, in the measurement of utility, the algebraical or diagrammatic determination of economic equilibriums, and the application of the theory of probability to sampling and in the measurement of economic value or index numbers, showed the trend of the times in economics. The twentieth century has marked an acceleration of this trend. Political scientists have not only lagged far behind the economists in the use of statistics, but they have shown important resistance in some sections to following in this general direction. What is the explanation of this situation?

Those who write for this symposium faced two choices in their careers: producing highly specialized articles with little application to government controversies or devoting themselves to public policy and making contributions to it. They chose the latter. I want to explain my approach and also give recognition to the accomplishment of other scholars who have been engaged with contemporary issues. All of them are eminently comfortable in maintaining the original commitment of political science to public law. At the risk of overlooking deserving scholars, I also identify others who decided to orient their research to thinking about and helping to resolve government issues.