330 THEORY AND ADMINISTRATION 



cussion has been had. This will, in part, depend upon the conception 

 of such political ideas as sovereignty, law, etc. In the field of per- 

 formance of state functions and the exercise of state activities there 

 are questions of relationships. The separation and limitation of 

 powers, the character and range of governmental activity, and the 

 nature of government itself become problems for political theory. 

 The subject-matter of political theory is varied, and different writers 

 have given to it very diverse treatment. The same general sub- 

 ject-matter has in some instances, particularly in the eighteenth 

 century, given rise to theories leading to entirely opposite conclu- 

 sions, and later individualistic and socialistic theorists have used the 

 same subject-matter in support of the contentions of then* respective 

 positions. 



Admitting that political theory has a right to existence, and 

 that from the extent and nature of its subject-matter diverse con- 

 clusions may be drawn, the next general problem becomes one of 

 method. It would need no argument to arrive at the conclusion 

 that a theorist starting with a series of political axioms would arrive 

 at different conclusions from those of a theorist who viewed the state 

 as an historical evolution or that a believer in " the divine right of 

 kings " would evolve a different theory from that of an advocate of 

 the social contract theory. The problem of method easily becomes 

 a significant one for the political theorist. Indeed, it has been 

 claimed by some that the method is the most important of all the 

 problems as to political science and theory. 



Various methods have been used by political theorists. 



The formal explanation of political facts which has viewed the 

 state as static and subject to logical analysis has profoundly influ- 

 enced political theory. Certain valuable conclusions can doubtless 

 be drawn from such theorizing. The tendency of this method is 

 toward a purely legal view of the state. The method of pure logic, 

 as it has been called by some writers upon the Continent, tends to 

 give a narrow point of view, while at the same time the view gains 

 influence from its positiveness. 



A more positive method was that which assumed its definitions 

 and the reasons for them as well as assumed certain political axioms ; 

 then, by deductive reasoning in regard to the assumed state and 

 also in regard to the assumed character of man, drew its conclusions. 

 This doctrinaire school of theorists corresponded in some respects 

 to the Manchester school of economists. 



The historical method corrects many of the errors consequent upon 

 the rise of the above method. It shows what analysis or logic can- 

 not show, viz.: that reason is not the source of certain political 

 institutions and phenomena, but rather that their source is in special 

 conditions which arose in some earlier time. The doctrinaire 



