Reading 2 (!!only the readings will be tested)

an abstract idea that we attempt to define as we ask ad answer questions • e.g. freedom, democracy, justice, nationalism, federalism, identity most concepts are categories (e.g. elements of the periodic table) ! few clear-cut categories in social and political life we use concepts to get a handle on the real world (not to capture exact boundaries between social and political phenomena)

• look at how scholars have already conceptualized major ideas • don’t create a new concept unless it is necessary (otherwise you get multiple concepts for the same thing)

we identify concepts based on how they help us answer research questions

• clarity and coherence concepts must be explicit and clear to know what you are studying • consistency logically consistency is important internally and between different concepts • usefulness specific enough to allow for distinctions in analyzing examples • must allow to identify and measure variables e.g. democratization

some questions require more general concepts, others more specific concepts Sartori’s ladder of abstraction ranges from general concepts at the top to specific concepts at the bottom which rung you stand on depends on your specific question/study

• freedom in ‘‘negative’’ terms = you are free to the extent that nobody impinges on your ability to act in accordance with your own will • freedom in ‘‘positive’’ terms = you are free to the extent that one can engage in particular sorts of acts or ways of life • freedom in mystical terms: free to the extent that you experience transcendence through service to others etc. • Marxist interpretations: free to the extent that you aren’t alienated from others, your work and from a sense of purpose/meaning connection = freedom is a quality of an individual

the proces through which we make a concept measurable/workable there are many ways to operationalize a concept, all can be valid as long as the operational definition matches with the concept - e.g. concept democracy in terms of elections -> measure democracy by elections, not by e.g. norms

• a country holds a free and fair multiparty election • two turnovers of government at the ballot box have occurred, in which the ruling party loses an election and peacefully steps down from power • free and fair elections are held, and a constitutional law is in place guaranteeing the rights of freedom of speech, press, assembly, and religion to all citizens • there is no verifiable suppression of political participation and expression • more than 2/3 of citizens in a survey express values that reject authoritarian rule

a general set of explanatory claims about some specifiable empirical range • aims to explain more than a limited amount of cases/examples • is backed by supporting facts as evidence ! a theory is NOT to describe a hunch or idea (everyday use)

• normative theory = questions of values and moral beliefs (what should/what is the best) • empirical/positive theory = empirical questions (what is, what factors, what causes) *empirical theory: theory as a general explanation of why things happen

a specific prediction, derived from a theory, that can be tested against empirical evidence they are possible answers to a question if it receives support from evidence, it can become a thesis in an argument

deductive reasoning: - moving from general claims or theories to specific observations or predictions about a phenomenon or set of cases - (test an observable implication of the starting theory) deviant cases / outliers = a case that doesn’t fit the pattern predicted by a given theory

inductive reasoning (induction): the process of moving from specific observations to general claims we don’t do the research, find the answer, then go back and propose our hypothesis instead we (should) approach our hypothesis with an open mind toward what answers we may find, hypothesis can be right or wrong (mostly they are wrong)

a claim to argue on the basis of evidence from research an argument supported by the research evidence that comes from testing a hypothesis !not a full theory: needs ample evidence + multiple scholars

we narrow in on good explanations by finding increasing evidence that certain hypotheses are consistent with the evidence, while others aren’t we can rarely fully prove, name true, hypotheses competing theories may coexist there may be facts/evidence that support a theory and that undermine a theory at the same time wrong theories can hold sway for a long time until they are replaced

qualitative = a form of analysis that aims to discern relationships between events or phenomena as described in !narrative form!, such as an account of a historical process quantitative = a form of analysis that aims for the mathematical discernment of relationships between variables, typically involving a large number of cases or observations

the proces through which we aim to test observable implications (often about cause and effect) of any given theory + conclusions reached through this proces i.e. conclusions based on evidence