z-logo
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.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here