A politikai tudás
Political Knowledge

Summary/Abstract: „Our wisdom in social science questions is almost always retrospective only. This is, or ought to be, a humiliating experience for human beings: if justice is beyond us, we would like at least to claim knowledge.” (James Burnham) Can you imagine that a Noble Prize is anually awarded in political science? Whereas in certain life sciences and in economics it goes without saying that there is some sort of a standard by which it is decided for what achievement the Prize would be awarded, it cannot be claimed to be so in political science. Actual achievements in politics are acknowledged for assisting creation or maintaining of peace thus accentuating man’s profound yearning for security in the face of renewed hostilities between man and man which points toward the mysteries of human nature on the one hand, and the unresolveable character of politics on the other. Does it imply that achievements in political science cannot be accurately measured, but even if they can, their acknowledgement cannot appeal to universal knowledge? The issue at stake is whether political science is capable of realizing a universal potential like natural and formal sciences based on „facts” and logical inferences in a closed system. One has to bear in mind that modern Western science is the very first system of knowledge and beliefs that seems to be successful enough to claim universal validity. Such religious aspirations all failed and have been confined to particular cultures that are limited by other cultures. While political scientists pursue knowledge about politics, most of them take it for granted what they do as a political scientist. There is however a haunting question as to whether political science is identical with political knowledge. If it were then it is just a matter of time that political science achievements would be universally acknowledged like those of, say, chemistry. It may mean two things, firstly, that political knowledge is a miracle and futile, or if it is a feasable pursuit, then the main task is to dissolve it from the particular culture, otherwise we have to observe Steven Shapin’s claim that „the distinction between <truth> and <what locally counts as truth> can be adequate for some purposes while being fatal to others.” It is one of the oldest perplexities of human understanding whether politics can be studied with the slightest hope for acquiring knowledge about it. There are rampant sceptical views. The enormity of the task is reflected by the lack of common standards of political science, and the essay, which is a written and extended version of a lecture delivered at the ceremony of the Bibó Prize Award in December, 2003, is an attempt to taking stock of the epistemiological problems of political knowledge.

• Details
• Contents