TY - JOUR
T1 - For Example
T2 - How to Use Examples in Political Science
AU - Dryzek, John S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of American Political Science Association.
PY - 2024/5
Y1 - 2024/5
N2 - There is a large literature on the use of cases, hardly anything on examples. They are different: cases get analyzed, examples get deployed. Examples can perform clarifying, didactic, persuasive, universalizing, critical, and cogitative functions. These six functions all have their own logic, and a set of guidelines for how to perform each of them well is developed. However, compelling and persuasive examples can also mislead. Following Kahneman's distinction between system 1 (fast) and system 2 (slow) thinking, good examples both resonate in system 1 terms and invite system 2 scrutiny. The best examples are good in some aspect, flawed in interesting ways in others. A perfect example is a logical impossibility. The author's interest in convincing the reader and the discipline's interest in effective inquiry can diverge, a problem overcome if reason in inquiry is seen as essentially dialogical.
AB - There is a large literature on the use of cases, hardly anything on examples. They are different: cases get analyzed, examples get deployed. Examples can perform clarifying, didactic, persuasive, universalizing, critical, and cogitative functions. These six functions all have their own logic, and a set of guidelines for how to perform each of them well is developed. However, compelling and persuasive examples can also mislead. Following Kahneman's distinction between system 1 (fast) and system 2 (slow) thinking, good examples both resonate in system 1 terms and invite system 2 scrutiny. The best examples are good in some aspect, flawed in interesting ways in others. A perfect example is a logical impossibility. The author's interest in convincing the reader and the discipline's interest in effective inquiry can diverge, a problem overcome if reason in inquiry is seen as essentially dialogical.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85193047321&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/S0003055424000480
DO - 10.1017/S0003055424000480
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85193047321
SN - 0003-0554
SP - 1
EP - 13
JO - American Political Science Review
JF - American Political Science Review
ER -