LAUSR

Many advocates of interpretive approaches to the study of politics emphasize that what is at stake is a conflict between “quantitative” versus “qualitative” methods. By contrast, we begin by suggesting that political scientists are free to use whichever method they find most useful for their research purposes. Instead of methodological reasons for making the interpretive turn, political scientists have ethical reasons for adopting this paradigm. In particular, interpretive approaches give political scientists a better account of the nature and role of values in human life, a sense for how the historical past is ethically relevant, the ability to advance politically engaged sociologies, and a deliberative critique of technocracy. Political scientists should be free to critically engage, scrutinize, and even normatively evaluate human ethical positions.