This is the first in a series of posts about concepts and the (good and bad) ways we conceptualize the real world of politics. The second post explains when a concept is “good” while the third post is about “bad” concepts. These posts are inspired by the work and follow the tradition of the late great theorist Giovanni Sartori.
What is a concept?
To the extent that we try to understand the world out there, a concept is the basic unit of our thinking.
As shown in the graph (featured image above), concepts have a triangular structure.
They take the form of a language term (i.e., a word or label) that corresponds to specific meaning (i.e., cognition) and points to concrete referents, be they phenomena or events (i.e., empirical cases).
To conceptualize, therefore, requires three moves at once: (a) decide on a simple term with (b) unambiguous meaning that (c) points to clearly identifiable comparable referent units. The task is far from easy.
How do concepts work?
Schematically: Beginning from your term, you have to proceed through defining so as to give it specific meaning, and from there you must operationalize your definition in a way that it points to the referents intended. Notice that, as indicated by the arrows in the graph above, your term should cover both meaning and referents.
TERMINOLOGY
Meaning is what is in our mind; the intension or connotation of the concept; the explanans, what explains.
Referent(s) are what is out there; the extension or denotation of the concept; the explanandum, what is to be explained.
