Normative approach in political science. Comment. [2023/10m/150w/1a]
One of the most fundamental debates in political science is whether the discipline should describe politics as it is or prescribe how politics ought to be. This question lies at the heart of the normative approach. For UPSC aspirants, especially those with Political Science and International Relations (PSIR) as an optional, understanding the normative approach is essential.
The UPSC Mains Paper I often asks about various approaches to the study of politics. Questions like “Normative approach in political science, comment” test not only conceptual clarity but also the ability to connect classical political philosophy with contemporary debates.
Unfortunately, aspirants often find limited, fragmented content online. This blog post provides a complete, exam-ready, and SEO-friendly model answer (1000+ words) on the normative approach—integrating classical foundations, modern thinkers, methodological critiques, and Indian context.
What is the Normative Approach?
The normative approach in political science is a prescriptive methodology. It does not merely ask what is happening in politics but instead evaluates what should happen.
- Focus → Values, justice, legitimacy, equality, liberty.
- Nature → Value-laden, philosophical, prescriptive.
- Contrast → Opposed to empirical/behavioral approaches that stress scientific objectivity.
As Leo Strauss famously argued, divorcing politics from values leads to moral relativism. The normative approach therefore insists that political science must engage with ethical dimensions.
Classical Foundations of the Normative Approach
The origins of normative thinking are found in ancient political philosophy:
- Plato’s Republic – Concerned with the ideal state and justice.
- Aristotle’s Politics – Defined humans as “political animals” and emphasized virtue and the good life.
This tradition continued with:
- Cicero – Natural law and universal justice.
- Medieval scholastics – St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas.
- Early modern thinkers – Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, all prescribing social contracts as ought-to-be models.
Thus, political science historically began as a normative discipline.
Modern Normative Thinkers and Theories
In the 20th century, normative political theory was revived:
- John Rawls – A Theory of Justice (1971)
- Original position & veil of ignorance.
- Principles of distributive justice (liberty + equality).
- Robert Nozick – Anarchy, State and Utopia (1974)
- Libertarian normative framework.
- Minimum state as the only legitimate one.
- Michael Sandel – Communitarian critique
- Liberal theories ignore community, culture, and shared values.
- Jürgen Habermas – Discourse Ethics
- Legitimacy through free and rational deliberation.
These demonstrate that normative approaches produce competing but structured moral visions of politics.
Methodological Characteristics of Normative Approach
1. Value-Laden Analysis
- Political science is not value-free.
- Every concept (power, authority, legitimacy) carries ethical weight.
2. Prescriptive Orientation
- Goes beyond description to say what ought to be.
- Example: Democracy is not just studied as a system but as a value standard.
3. Philosophical Methodology
- Uses conceptual analysis, logical reasoning, moral argumentation.
- Ronald Dworkin – Law and politics need interpretive reasoning.
Contemporary Relevance and Debates
After the behavioral revolution (1950s), political science turned empirical, but the post-behavioral revolution (1960s onwards) brought normative approaches back.
- Amartya Sen – Capability Approach: Justice is about expanding freedoms.
- Martha Nussbaum – Feminist and capability theory: Normative framework for gender justice.
- Human Rights & Climate Justice: Global challenges require value-based frameworks.
Criticisms
- Empiricists – Normative lacks scientific rigor and falsifiability.
- Max Weber – Stressed fact–value distinction.
- Positivists – Prefer data, not moral prescriptions.
Yet, pure empiricism risks irrelevance: without values, political science cannot guide society.
Normative Approach in Indian Political Thought
India provides rich examples of normative frameworks:
- Mahatma Gandhi – Satyagraha, non-violence, truth as moral foundations.
- B.R. Ambedkar – Constitutional morality, social justice, fraternity.
- Indian Constitution – Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) institutionalize normative ideals.
- Judicial Activism – Supreme Court often uses normative reasoning (e.g., Kesavananda Bharati case on basic structure).
Thus, Indian political thought integrates normative philosophy with institutional practice.
Global Applications of Normative Approach
In global politics, normative theory remains central:
- Climate Justice – Equity in carbon emissions.
- Human Rights – Universal norms vs. cultural relativism.
- Global Democracy – Legitimacy of supranational institutions (UN, EU).
- Cosmopolitan vs. Communitarian Debate – Nussbaum (cosmopolitanism) vs. David Miller (communitarianism).
Critical Evaluation
- Strengths
- Provides moral compass to politics.
- Keeps political science connected to justice, equality, legitimacy.
- Bridges theory with practice (development, democracy).
- Weaknesses
- Accused of being unscientific.
- Subjective and culturally biased.
- Cannot be tested empirically.
👉 Balanced View: Normative and empirical must complement each other. Political science requires methodological pluralism.
Conclusion
The normative approach remains indispensable. While behavioralism gave political science rigor, it risked losing its moral essence. Normative theory ensures politics does not become a soulless science but remains tied to values of justice, liberty, equality, and democracy.
For UPSC aspirants, remembering both the criticisms and the relevance is key: in Mains answers, highlight how normative approaches complement empirical research, especially in today’s world of rights, development, and global justice.
👉 Takeaway for UPSC: Always balance what is with what ought to be.
Also View: M.N. Roy’s Humanistic Marxism: Radical Humanism
Value Addition Table: Normative vs. Other Approaches
| Feature | Normative Approach | Empirical Approach | Behavioral Approach |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core Question | What should be? (Ideal) | What is? (Reality) | How does it actually behave? |
| Focus | Values, justice, liberty, equality | Facts, observation, data | Behavior, attitudes, measurable patterns |
| Nature | Prescriptive, moral | Descriptive, objective | Scientific, data-driven |
| Methods Used | Philosophy, reasoning, moral arguments | Observation, case studies | Surveys, statistics, psychology |
| Thinkers/Scholars | Plato, Aristotle, Rawls, Ambedkar | Machiavelli, David Easton (early empirical) | David Easton, Robert Dahl, Gabriel Almond |
| Criticism | Subjective, lacks rigor | Too descriptive, ignores values | Overly scientific, ignores ethics |
| UPSC Usage | Use in evaluative parts of answers | Use for factual support | Use for contemporary examples/data |
Quick Revision Summary (for Aspirants)
- Definition: Normative = prescriptive, value-based.
- Classical roots: Plato, Aristotle.
- Modern thinkers: Rawls, Nozick, Sandel, Habermas.
- Indian context: Gandhi, Ambedkar, DPSP, judicial activism.
- Criticisms: Lacks scientific rigor, fact–value distinction.
- Contemporary relevance: Human rights, climate justice, gender equality.
- UPSC Tip: Always end with a balanced conclusion.
FAQs
Q1: What is the normative approach in political science in simple words?
The normative approach studies politics by asking what should be, not just what is. It deals with justice, liberty, equality, and moral values rather than only facts and data.
Q2: How is the normative approach different from the empirical or behavioral approach?
The normative approach is value-based and prescriptive, while empirical and behavioral approaches are data-driven and descriptive. Normative tells us the ideal way politics should function, whereas behavioral explains how politics actually works.
Q3: Why is the normative approach important for UPSC aspirants?
In UPSC mains (especially PSIR optional), answers are not judged only on facts. Evaluative and value-based analysis is expected. Quoting thinkers like Rawls, Nozick, and Ambedkar helps show normative depth.
Q4: What are the major criticisms of the normative approach?
Lacks scientific rigor.
Subjective and culturally biased.
Cannot be empirically tested.
Often seen as too abstract.
About The Author
