Methods of normative political theory

The section of methods in political theory at the ECPR general conference has been a central venue for discussion of methodology since it began in 2016. These sections organized regularly have been recently solidified by creating of a standing group of Methods of Normative Political Theory, by the approval of ECPR Executive Committee in 2022. The standing group has significantly contributed to the ‘methodological turn’ and to the bourgeoning literature in political theory methodology (Dowding, 2020) (2022) (Perez, 2020). As an active network in the framework of the ECPR, it has its quarterly newsletters; organized various events including Joint Sessions of Workshops (2022, 2023) and Winter School (2022). Until the last year, the events mostly focused on general methodological debates, emphasizing the diversity of approaches oriented significantly around ‘how to do’ political theory. Last year witnessed a new development in the standing group’s section with panels going beyond these general methodological debates to specific questions. Just as explicit ‘how to’ questions develop from ‘general debates’, more exploratory and experimental conversations about methodology follow on from specific guidance. 2024 will still have space for both general debates and ‘how to’ instruction, but the predominant theme of this section proposal is exploratory and experimental methods, with consideration of how this could improve diversity and inclusivity. Following the idea that methods are a ‘toolbox’ we go to, in order to find the right tool for the job, we particularly invite theorists to submit innovative, even ‘unready’ ideas, with the presumption that a conference is a space to be experimental. Panels: 1. Fictional Narratives, Storytelling and Imaginary Cases Storytelling has had some, but not extensive, methodological focus or attention (Frazer, 2017) (Stevens, 2017). With the ethnographic turn in political theory, or political theory in an ‘ethnographic key’ (Herzog & Zacka, 2017) (Longo & Zacka, 2019) (Perez, 2020), comes a challenge to methods that involve storytelling and fiction. Does ethnography make imaginary cases defunct, or is the project to combine ethnographic data with compelling, but generally fictional, narrative? Are we to limit fictional thought experiments to spaces where ethnographic data is not as easy to collect – non-human species, some indigenous tribes, etc? Or, similarly, as insightful counterfactuals? This panel examines what storytelling methods exactly are and what their methodological role is. 2. Experimental Methods Jonathan Floyd’s normative behaviourism (2017) (2020) has been established as a new method that invites intense debate, but what is often overlooked in these discussions, is Floyd himself has said the method is open to change and experiment. NB is not set in stone, and this is a reminder that neither are any of our methods. This panel invites any experimental and exploratory methodological innovations or ideas in political theory, whether it be something completely different, or a reinvention of the familiar (new wine in old bottles). 3. Public Political Philosophy Contributions on whether or not a public political philosophy should be a thing (Waldron, 1995) (Lamb, 2018) have occurred over the years, as have thoughts on what it would look like (Floyd, 2022). This panel invites submissions around any of these features. Questions like, but not limited to, i) ought we pursue a public political philosophy? ii) what methods would they take? iii) How, exactly, should we conceptualise the ‘public’ in this context – who are they, and do our students count? This panel therefore also invites any considerations on the relationship between teaching and research methods. 4. Political Theory Methodology: General vs Theme-specific Methodologies Certain thematic subjects in political theory include methodological (dis)agreements of central importance. For example, the literature on political theory of migration and multiculturalism includes the debate on ‘methodological nationalism’ (Dumitru 2014; Sager 2016, 2021) centrally. Even indirectly various normative disagreements stem from methodological disagreements. The aim of this panel is to reconnect these theme-specific debates to the general methodological debates in political theory; e.g. conceptual analysis; ideological analysis and so forth. What relationship, if any, is there between these theme-specific debates and various general methodological debates in political theory? Are the former always a theme-specific variant of the various general debates? If not, could the theme-specific debates give rise to new kinds of general methodological debates? The panel aims at including various themes addressing these and other related methodological questions. 5. Political Theory and other Disciplines Political theory is always going to be interdisciplinary, but what do we share specifically with other disciplines, and equally important, what have we presumed to share that we in fact do not? Keith Dowding’s recent article on the relationship between political philosophy, moral philosophy and political science examined both these questions (2020), pushing PP closer to political science, and further away from moral philosophy. This panel invites similar considerations around this, and with other subjects. 6. Comparative Political Theory Comparative political theory has tended to focus on examining thoughts and utterances from different geographic and cultural traditions, (Tully, 2016), including indigenous peoples, but this panel broadens this to other areas. For example, feminist theory, queer theory, disability theory, and so on. Are these part of the same political theory tradition or are they now comparative, in terms of their methodological approaches (do they have different methodological approaches?). If we consider them sub-categories of political theory, then what is distinct about PT from other traditions that makes it fall under the category of ‘comparative’, when these other forms do not? 7. Critical Political Theory Critical theory has found itself in tension with decolonising narratives because of potential universal assumptions, either about historic progress or cultural development (Allen, 2016). To what extent do we require ‘new directions’ in critical theory, and how does this affect our methods? This panel invites methodological debates on how to reconcile critical theory’s claims of universalism with contextual challenges.