The continued significance of positivism?

Bibliographic Data

ID23710718
AuthorsMichael Nicholson (0000-0001-5492-0679, corresponding author)
Year1996
Pages128-146
Publication date1996-06-13
Open AccessYes
TypeCHAPTER
VenueInternational Theory (SOURCE_BOOK)
PublisherCambridge University Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1017/cbo9780511660054.008
OpenAlexW1256108514
ISBN9780511660054
LanguageEN
Citations received10

Introduction It is sometimes claimed that a positivist approach to international relations is still dominant, implying that it not only is dominant now but has been for some time in the past. I am not sure how dominance would be defined in any strict way and would not be confident I would recognise it if I saw it. There is certainly a lot of work done in international relations which is not of a positivist nature. However, it is hard to dispute that a lot of research is being done currently using research strategies based on essentially positivist principles. These are widely regarded as appropriate to the tasks in hand and are widely practised by scholars who do not seem to doubt their legitimacy. This view of the position of positivism is probably generally accepted by scholars though they would be divided on whether this acceptance was with pleasure or regret. In confirmation there are a host of papers in the Journal of Conflict Resolution or the International Studies Quarterly where formal models are analysed, or quantified relationships are studied, and where the whole ethos is of one of firm positivism (except, of course, for one famous issue when the latter journal was handed over to the post-modernists). Most of the papers on conflict or international relations in the American Political Science Review are likewise in this mode.

Epistemology · Positivism · Economic Theory and Institutions · Philosophy · Philosophy, Science, and History · Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access