Introduction
Why do we compare? According to Landman (2000: 4), there exists a straightforward answer to this question: “Making comparison is a natural human activity. From antiquity to the present, generations of humans have sought to understand and explain the similarities and differences they perceive between themselves and others. […] In short, to compare is to be human.” While this truth may help us to recognise the fundamental ways of human perception and thinking, a proper understanding of the crucial role which comes up to the comparative method in political science has more to do with the general methodical shortcomings of the social sciences as a discipline. This paper focuses upon the advantages and limitations of the comparative method in political science. It develops the thesis that, notwithstanding the fact that there are some serious inherent problems, the benefits of the method are still prevailing if we carefully anticipate its pitfalls and try to avoid them. However, before we are able to contrast the positive and the negative aspects of a particular method it is necessary to examine its basic elements more precisely. Therefore, firstly, the characteristics of the comparative method will be outlined by means of contrasting it with other approaches of doing research. Secondly, the potentialities and advantages which the comparative method offers for political science will be explored. This will include some more fundamental considerations of the raison d'être of scientific research in general – making inferences and generalisations – and of the specific implications for the social sciences as a ‘soft’ discipline without deterministic laws and the possibility to conduct experiments. Against this background it will be demonstrated that the simple fact that political science does in the majority of cases not have access to superior research designs can be considered as the main ‘advantage’ of the comparative method. Thirdly, the problems and...