Rigour, gate keeping and security
A debate with Bellamy and McDonald
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6235340 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Samuel M Makinda (0000-0002-9880-0166, Murdoch University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2005 |
| Volume | 40 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 419-423 |
| Publication date | 2005-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Australian Journal of Political Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1036-1146 • E-ISSN: 1363-030X |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/10361140500204009 |
| OpenAlex | W1996534176 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 6 |
I am pleased that Bellamy and McDonald have explained why they used an altered version of solidarism. Had they cited the post-1977 sources, rather than Hedley Bull's 1966 paper, in their article, my reaction would have been different. However, they have responded with further charges. Given space constraints, I respond to some, but not all, of their charges. This rejoinder is divided into five parts. The first defines the English School (ES), while the second discusses security in the ES. The third addresses the claim that I portrayed human security as a threat to the ES and the fourth examines the argument that I regard ES texts as sacred. The final part speculates about what we might learn from this debate
Argument (complex analysis · Epistemology · Law and economics · Linguistics · Political science · Rigour · Sociology · Chemistry · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,1 |
| Citation span | 2005 - 2015 (11) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |