ABSTRACT
Contrary to widespread belief, the naturalism and anti-naturalism debate in political science is about philosophy, not methods. Because this conflict is philosophical and not methodological, political scientists are free to embrace whatever methods suit their research purposes. That is, method pluralism can reign supreme over political science. But this method pluralism does not imply that the naturalist/anti-naturalist debate is safely forgotten or somehow resolved. On the contrary, the duelling philosophical assumptions facing off in this debate remain of the greatest importance to the study of politics today. What are these duelling assumptions?
