Revolt against traditional methods of political science

A comparison of traditional and behavioural approaches will make the distinction between their approaches, methods, focus, scope and subject matter clear.

• First, while traditional political enquiry is heavily inclined towards value theory, behavioural enquiry seeks causal theory. The focus in traditional enquiry is on normative principles; behavioural approach insists on logical assumptions and factual statements.
• Second, the focus in traditional studies is on description, while the behavioural approach seeks explanation and analysis.
• Third, the traditional approach generally applies deductive methods in which one moves from the general to the particular; hence it is speculative. The behavioural approach uses the inductive approach in which one moves from the particular to the general.
• Fourth, traditional political science is concerned more with institutions and legal concepts, while in the behavioural approach political processes constitute the main analytical framework.
• Fifth, in traditional political enquiry, the political arena is treated as separate. The behavioural approach seeks an integrated understanding of politics and political behaviour.
• Sixth, traditional political science is based on enquiry into Western political values (Greek, Roman and post-Renaissance Europe), while behavioural approach has opened the scope for enquiry in developing societies also.
• Seventh, the behavioural approach is inter-disciplinary and is based on scientific and analytical methods, whereas the traditional approach is value-based and even speculative.

These differences show that the behavioural approach is really a revolt against traditional political enquiry. The eight intellectual foundation stones listed by Easton are proof of this revolt.