Talk:Systems theory in political science

Systems High‑importance

	Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is not associated with a particular field. Fields are listed on the template page.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

This article appears based only on Easton's earliest work and contains some misconceptions (e.g., "mechanistic," "delimited boundaries"). The section on critiques is particularly weak and needs references or should be removed. Dr. Perfessor (talk) 02:25, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Critiques[edit]

This section (below) was moved from the article because it needs references and elaboration to make any sense. Some of the critiques conflict with each other, and others make no sense as stated. For example, how can a theory based on often unpredictable and irrational human behavior be characterized as "mechanistic?" What is mechanical about human behavior?

Another example: Easton describes an open system which, by definition, cannot exclude "inputs" that might distort the system.

If these "critiques" are not elaborated and referenced they will be deleted. Dr. Perfessor (talk) 23:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Critiques

The theory ignores specific contexts. Contemporary political science aspires to create general theory by looking at more contextualized problems.

The theory is unfalsifiable.

The theory privileges stability and, thus, fails to explain system breakdown or conflict.

The theory rejects any accidents or outside inputs that will distort the system. In other words, this view esposues that each political system can be isolated from others (see autonomy, sovereignty).

The theory ignores the State.

The theory is mechanistic, thereby ignoring variation and system differentiation.

The theory is modelled out of the United States political system, thereby ignoring that there are other political systems that are stable without significant political competition (see Authoritarianism).

Further comment[edit]

Hi, I changed some of the lay out here because I didn't understand you first meassage, what section you removed. Now I think it is ok for now. If some critique will be readded to the article, it should at least have some decent references. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 09:35, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Political science[edit]

Examine David Easton contribution to the system approach 110.224.251.164 (talk) 22:47, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]