# data[].attributes.body
Does corruption lead to poverty?

# data[].attributes.body
The subject of this week's reading text is not only very sensitive but also very important. In society, it was argued that women and men were different by nature, and even in the last century, women had to be educated in different fields for this reason alone. As it is known, the most important and obvious example of this is the profession. They put forward genders and social barriers to create a gap between men and women. It has been claimed that men and women cannot do the same job or that a woman cannot do the job that a man does, and it is strongly opposed. In addition, gender is still an issue in the policy arena. Women's demands for equality and freedom in social life, especially in the family, education and profession, are very high. Equal opportunities should be given to women and the talented ones should not be ignored and they should be supported in this regard just like men. In addition, it took a lot of effort for women to be accepted in political environments. Although it is generally said that very few women have the courage to participate in politics and to be a candidate, the main reason for this is the negative thoughts that society has imposed on us for years. As seen in Turkey, the fact that there are more men by gender in the parliament may close the doors of politics to women or discourage them. Women who have succeeded in taking part in political platforms instill their own wishes and thoughts. A difficult process awaits women while entering politics and following it. One of the hardest things to break down the stereotypical male-dominated thought is, perhaps, first. Increasing the contribution of women in the country they live in, taking part in decision mechanisms and participating in political decisions are also important for the country's economy. After all, when we look at the developed countries, they give importance to equality in the political sense (also in other fields). Unfortunately, it can be seen that men are more dominant than women in many areas of life in underdeveloped and developing countries. It is obvious that feminism is an issue that needs to be discussed in politics. All women want is equality and freedom. I don't understand why this is so hard.

# data[].attributes.body
When I read this chapter, it is clearly understood that interpretation and constructivism are against positivism. As we know, those who advocate positivism aim to prove the validity and reliability of the findings in the research. The interpreter-constructivist is concerned with the originality, persuasiveness, legitimacy, accuracy, criticality, coherence, intelligibility, and evaluability of his interpretations. In short, interpretivism-constructivism is concerned with complementarity rather than the acquisition of proven findings. Interpretationism-constructivism is arguably rooted in theories such as social action theory and theories of chaos, complexity, and conflict.

On the other hand, it is stated in the text that the roots of constructivism are in postmodernism. A constructivist view is because people adopt one thing rather than another because of the particular ideas, beliefs, norms, and identities with which people observe the world. The postmodern orientation demands that in order to deal with the researcher in its entirety, he must take everything into account. Reality is in a sense constructed by the mind, not simply perceived by the mind. Therefore, no empirical "fact" that is not currently theory-laden counts as constructivism. However, non-constructivist scholars disagree with this view and argue that we act in response to geography, resources, and relative power. Since constructivists consider the most important element of international relations to be social, it is argued that the study of the social and political world, including international relations, should focus on beliefs and ideas, not a physical entity or material thing. Finally, and in short, constructivism is diverse, as some constructivists work with attention to other aspects of international social reality, and I think it will play a vital role in political science in the future.

# data[].attributes.body
This week's reading task included behavior analysis and rational choice. First of all, to talk about behavior analysis, it argues that political and social theories should be corrected on the basis of observable behavior. In other words, this behavioral analysis actually originates from positivism. Because it enables the development of scientific knowledge by looking at whether it is correct or not. According to this understanding, since only observable and measurable data should be examined in political science, it narrows its field. In addition, it is stated that the most important behavioral contribution to political science is election studies. In other words, it can be revealed by observable analysis that the people living in rural areas in Turkey tend to vote more for the conservative party, and the people living in the western cities tend to vote more for the liberal parties. It has been observed that social class has a relationship with political behavior. Actually this concept is very exciting because it makes a great contribution to the acceptance of political science as a science. The fact that they are based on empirical attitude is the biggest proof of this. I think it's really important. Unfortunately, the persistent demand for quantitative data narrows this field. Behavioral thinking changed and post-behavioralism emerged. It drew attention to the study of all the facts of politics. It supported that values ​​cannot be deduced from political science. Finally, it acknowledged that theoretical approaches influence seemingly objective observations. Rational choice is similar to this. This issue is also very related to the first issue. It argues that individuals choose an action that suits their personal preferences, as stated in the article. The rational choice must rely on assumptions because it knows it cannot conduct political experiments on people. In short, rational choice is a methodical approach that analyzes the individual and social behaviors of the individual. Although rational choice theory accepts that the social environment has a complex structure, it largely ignores this complexity in order to reach some predictions from the general attitudes of individuals.

# data[].attributes.body
When I followed the nature of social research, it showed me a very positive attitude in terms of understanding social issues, political issues and suggesting healthier solutions in terms of being based on understanding, description and interpretation. At election times, it exhibits some positivist attitude in order to investigate the voting rates or which party it voted for. Positivism is the conduct of scientific research on observable and measurable facts. It is at this point that the qualitative field emerges alongside the quantitative field. Situations that require understanding and interpreting these behaviors of people reveal qualitative research. That is post positivism. Post-positivists argue that observations may not always be correct and are prone to error. Therefore, they emphasize that more than one method and methods should be used while doing research.

Epistemology deals with the aspect of acquiring knowledge. It is more concerned with the natural sources, scope and limits of knowledge. For example, positivism has an epistemological point of view. Evidence and experimentation are required to gain knowledge from this point of view. Facts based on false information or just lucky guesses cannot be interpreted as information. We use epistemology in globalization. We can use epistemology for the economy to become the single market or to wage war against the nation-state. As exemplified in the book, it can be empirically approached whether globalized brands such as coca cola are associated with a similar global culture. In short, what I understand from this reading ontology is about what is true, and epistemology is about the methods of finding these truths. Epistemology, on the other hand, is how we can prove our point of view or prove our point of view that will contribute to the truth. Ontology aims to discover people's different understandings of power, to examine the consistency of these understandings and to offer new perspectives. The discussions mentioned in the book, on the other hand, show that experience and logic are combined.

# data[].attributes.body
"Is political science a science? If yes, why? If not, why not?"
Although the question of whether political science is a science is a very controversial subject, the answer seems to lie in the question. Politics is a science and it has its theories and methods. In fact, when science is mentioned, people think of experiments, mathematical operations, physics, chemistry, etc. terms coming. In addition, it must be based on evidence. It is wrong, in my opinion, to be so specific and narrowly molded into the explanation of science. In addition, political science systematically blends subjective judgments with objective judgments, defeating the notion that "politics is not a science". In addition, it is a science as it is based on researching and analyzing human behavior and society. Policy; It proves that it is a science by frequently using questions such as what, why and how. For example, in the voting process of the citizens, research can be done such as why they voted for party B rather than party A. It can detect the general trend. Thus, as in other sciences, a non-subjective, that is, an objective opinion can be reached. That is, it involves interpretive research rather than scientific research. Like other sciences, it does not contain a definite result. According to the social sciences methodology book I read, in order for political sciences to be accepted as science, empiricist approaches must first be rejected and the working procedures of sciences such as physics must not be used in politics. After all, a human is not a test subject. Like other sciences, we cannot use laboratories or perform mathematical operations on people in political science. We can study human behavior only in human nature. In short, politics is a science. we simply cannot mold it like other sciences because it basically deals with society and the state. In order to accept this situation, it is necessary not to fit into the molds.