Big wars, little wars, and theory construction

Bibliographic Data

ID11895751
AuthorsJack S Levy (0000-0003-3278-9088, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, corresponding author)
Year1990
Volume16
Issue3
Pages215-224
Publication date1990-12-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Interactions (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0305-0629 • E-ISSN: 1547-7444
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/03050629008434757
OpenAlexW2094315499
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited21

I argue that there is no a priori ground for claiming that a general theory of all wars is preferable to separate theories of big wars and little wars, or vice‐versa. The analytical distinction between “big” war and “little” war is excessively vague and devoid of empirical content, and it begs the more important question of what typologies of wars (if any) are most useful for the purposes of theory construction. Moreover, the relative utility of a single or separate theories depends on the specific question one wishes to answer, on the theory one constructs for that purpose, and on the tradeoffs one is willing to make among different criteria of theory evaluation. The tradeoffs between the parsimony and analytic power of a theory and its descriptive accuracy and predictive power are particularly important. These tradeoffs cannot be made in the abstract, for they require an evaluation of the degree of empirical support of each theory as well as its analytic power

A priori and a posteriori · Economics · Empirical research · Epistemology · Mathematical economics · Positive economics · Power (physics · Predictive power · Global Security and Public Health · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Nuclear Issues and Defense · Philosophy

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub