Premium
Dissenting (in part) with the Dissent: A Response to James Johnson
Author(s) -
Hug Simon
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
swiss political science review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.632
H-Index - 30
eISSN - 1662-6370
pISSN - 1424-7755
DOI - 10.1111/spsr.12142
Subject(s) - dissenting opinion , dissent , reading (process) , politics , focus (optics) , epistemology , positive economics , rational choice theory (criminology) , sociology , empirical research , content (measure theory) , law and economics , political science , law , economics , philosophy , mathematical analysis , physics , mathematics , optics
As James Johnson largely restates many of my points raised in my overview of rational choice contributions to political science, I focus in my response on one point of disagreement. While Johnson implies that rational choice models have no empirical content, I argue that this is based on a very partial reading of several contributions. As Johnson refrains from offering any indications on what social science theory, according to his standards, actually has empirical content, his critique is unsatisfying.