Search results

Purpose – This chapter discusses the increased acceptance of biopolitical research by mainstream political science and examines the potential causes. It demonstrates that the changing status of biopolitics is part of a more general pattern in academia, where biological explanations of social phenomena are increasingly viewed as acceptable and even necessary.

Design/methodology/approach – A brief review of the history of the literature of biopolitics with a content analysis of the three leading general-readership journals of political science and other measures of activity in biopolitics.

Findings – Political scientists until recently have not been receptive to the arguments advanced by proponents of biopolitics, but this resistance is weakening. This case for a more biologically oriented political science is more tenable now in part because of the groundwork done by the early generation of biopolitics scholars but mainly because of changing circumstances.

Purpose – This chapter is designed to acquaint readers with examples of and issues in graduate education in biology and politics.

Design/methodology/approach – The main method adopted is the case study. Several programs or suggestions of how a program might develop are provided.

Findings – There are several examples of graduate education in biology and politics. These illustrate how different departments carry out educating students in biology and politics. Approaches include a biology and politics track in a political science program or interdisciplinary collaborations.

Research limitations – There are only a handful of case studies. Considering how other programs work would be a useful future research initiative to pursue.

Biology and Politics (or Biopolitics) has been a part of the political science firmament since the 1960s. Over time, it has become less an odd outlier in the discipline and more a tolerated (and sometimes respected) part of the enterprise. After about 50 years of existence, this is a proper time to reflect on where biopolitics has been, where it is now, and where it might go as an academic endeavor. Indeed, some have said that the best step would for biopolitics to no longer be seen as a special, narrow part of political science – but a part of every field in the discipline, integrated into the larger world of the study of politics.

Politics in human societies represents a variation, and elaboration, on a major evolutionary theme. Political processes have played an important functional role in goal-oriented, cooperative social systems in the natural world. This view of politics is also consistent with a causal theory – known as the Synergism Hypothesis – which explains the rise of complexity in evolution over time and, equally important, the frequent examples of devolution and dissolution. In addition to a brief discussion of this theory, the evolution of political systems in humankind will be described, from its possible origins among our remote australopithecine ancestors to the emergence of complex modern civilizations. Now, however, we confront an existential threat to our species, and to many others, due mainly to climate change. The future is very problematic. I will argue here that the only viable path going forward is a new social contract coupled with (democratic) global governance – a global “superorganism.”