Philosophy of Social Science in IR

A shift towards a scientific approach in International Relations, influenced by positivism, but not always following scientific practices.

A specific philosophy of science, dominating the behavioral revolution, that became synonymous with 'science' in IR.

A particular type of positivism influencing the behavioral revolution in IR, focused on observable facts and empirical data.

The underlying set of beliefs and methods about how to conduct scientific research in IR.

A methodology used in research to understand events in IR; this is nuanced and can be misinterpreted regarding positivism's influence.

A core element of positivism, which avoids looking for deep causes of events. It instead focuses on observable data.

A complex concept, with a lack of consensus on the definition of positivism itself, making its application in IR complex.

The difficulties and misinterpretations that often arise when discussing the scientific approach to studying IR, specifically in regards to positivism.

Critical theory doesn't reject positivism, but argues that scientific knowledge for control isn't the only valid type of knowledge.

Habermas considered positivist, hermeneutic, and critical research to be legitimate parts of social science inquiry.

Feminist researchers criticized social science for being centered on men and for ignoring gendered knowledge creation.

These are complex schools of thought critical of social science structures, but do not solely rely on subjective agents.

Post-structuralism is critical of structuralism's attempt to create an objective science of social structures, but doesn't return to subjective agency.

Positivism is a valid philosophy of science, but debate exists on the boundaries of its applications within the social sciences.

There's a lack of agreement within feminist approaches concerning appropriate research standards.

The difference between postmodernism and post-structuralism is sometimes unclear or not considered significant, and the terms are frequently used interchangeably.

A way of studying social practices by focusing on the structures and principles that organize them, rather than individual viewpoints.

In structuralism, shifting attention away from individual experiences and focusing on broader social frameworks.

Post-structuralist idea that social structures lack a single, clear organizing principle.

Post-structuralist view that outcomes arising from social structures are not predictable or certain.

A theory that challenges the idea of structures having a fixed logic, emphasizing their potential for multiple interpretations and their relation to power.

An approach in International Relations Theory that views international politics through the lens of structures and power, without adhering to a structuralist meta-theory.

Post-structuralist argument that claims to scientific objectivity are often social constructs reflecting power dynamics and not true, pure scientific claims.

A perspective that expands post-structuralist critiques by questioning reason, reality, and truth itself.

The situation where various theoretical approaches in IR exist without forming a unified framework, creating divisions and limited collaboration.

The dominant approach in IR research, primarily based in the United States, emphasizing empirical data analysis and a scientific methodology.

A philosophy of science that heavily influences the positivist approach in IR, emphasizing the scientific method and progress through refutation of theories.

An alternative to positivism in IR that emphasizes the existence of real, underlying structures and mechanisms, but still uses scientific methods.

The study of what exists, or the nature of reality, which is becoming more prominent in IR, particularly within Scientific Realism.

A philosophical approach focused on practical application and problem-solving, emphasizing 'practices' rather than theoretical debates about what is real.

A shift towards focusing on concrete actions and behaviors in international relations, rather than abstract theories.

An IR theory that emphasizes the interconnectedness and interdependence of actors, suggesting that international relations are shaped by their interactions.

A broader approach to science that acknowledges limitations of traditional positivism, embracing scientific inquiry but with more nuance. It may critique some aspects of positivism.

Direct rejection of positivism's core tenets. This does not necessarily equal anti-science, but rather challenges the limitations of classical positivism.

Knowledge is gained solely through sensory experiences and observations. This approach emphasizes empirical data as the primary source of knowledge.

These two approaches to science have fundamentally different views. Positivism limits itself to observed data, while Scientific Realism seeks to understand the underlying causes of phenomena.

The view that our knowledge is limited by our own perception and experience, and we cannot access objective truth directly. Empiricism can be seen as anti-realist.

The term 'positivism' has been misinterpreted and misapplied in IR, causing confusion about its meaning and leading to inaccurate discussions about scientific methods.

A theoretical approach in IR that emphasizes the social construction of reality, meaning that our understanding of the world is shaped by our beliefs, values, and interactions.

The idea that our understanding of the world is not objective but is shaped by our social experiences, interactions, and cultural norms.

Waltz, a prominent realist scholar, acknowledges the social construction of the international system, but argues that this does not make him a constructivist because he focuses on the structure of the system.

Waltz's acceptance of social construction challenges the definition of constructivism and its core tenets, highlighting the complexities in categorizing scholars.

Constructivists believe that the shared understanding of the social world is fundamental to their approach and sets them apart.

While Waltz acknowledges social construction, his focus on structure differentiates him from other constructivists, leading to debate about his position.

Waltz's position challenges the core assumptions of constructivism, emphasizing the importance of defining and understanding key concepts.

We can understand international relations by exploring different theoretical approaches like constructivism and realism, and analyzing scholars' positions.