While there is a large literature on the use of cases, there is very little on the use of examples in social science and political theory (there is some discussion in the literature on Hobbes, who cautioned against using examples; quite a lot in moral philosophy). Cases and examples are different: cases get analysed, examples get deployed. On the face of it, a good example is one that manifests a conceptual, descriptive, interpretive, explanatory, or normative point in unambiguous fashion, helping the reader/listener to understand the point. I argue that this is not altogether true, because good examples have properties independent of how well they manifest the point at hand. Perhaps this explains the popularity of some examples (such as Martin Luther King), used to illustrate many different (even contradictory) points. Examples should also help persuade, which means that they can be evaluated as pieces of rhetoric (because rhetoric covers persuasion in all its forms). The Aristotelian principles of logos, ethos, and pathos are relevant. An unambiguous implicit storyline, drama, and resonance with the lifeworld of the reader/listener all help. However, examples can be effective in persuasive terms but also mislead. In terms of Kahneman’s distinction between system 1 (fast) and system 2 (slow) thinking, a good example should resonate in system 1 terms, but also survive system 2 scrutiny. I examine some deployments of examples in these terms, drawing from the American Political Science Review and other sources.

John Dryzek is Distinguished Professor and former Australian Research Council Laureate Fellow in the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. Before moving to UC, he was Distinguished Professor of Political Science and ARC Federation Fellow at the Australian National University. He is former Head of the Political Science Departments at the University of Oregon and University of Melbourne, and of the Social and Political Theory Program at ANU. Working in both political theory and empirical social science, he is best known for his contributions in the areas of democratic theory and practice and environmental politics. His next (co-authored) book is Deliberative Democracy for Diabolical Times: Confronting Populism, Extremism, Denial and Authoritarianism.