Majority of the philosophical and political debates that emerged in the nineteenth and twentieth century usually revolved around the ways and methods of attainment of knowledge rather than knowledge itself. The early debates usually focused upon scientific 'fact based' knowledge which cen be testified through tests and trials and hence leaves no room for any doubt to exist. However the study of IR cannot be substantiated through scientific and arithmetical means and requires deep analytic skills which can measure historical processes through a unique lens. The quest fir this knowledge, hence, deviated from the early debates regarding and created its own niche in the field of knowledge .
The second debate took a leap from the positivist viewpoint and transcended towards a new post positivists approach which creates room for reason and rationality. Yosef Lapid's writings of the third debate however became a touchstone of variety of theoretical and methodological debates in the field. The third debate on the prospects of international theory in a post positivist era generated quite a buzz about the potential contributions of variety of alternative approaches to International studies and generated a rather introspective moment in the field, Lapid in his article questioned the foundations and directions of the field in the post cold war era. He managed to amalgamate the narrative of previous great debates and called for more pluralism and diversity in the field.
Although he managed to create diversity and openness in the field but made the possibility of a consensus more complex and difficult to comprehend for a common individual. There is no doubt with regards to the academic authenticity of his work but complexity and depth of his article have led to criticisms regarding the understanding of his work and have led to differing explanation and reviews which also fails to coincide at many instances.
The second debate took a leap from the positivist viewpoint and transcended towards a new post positivists approach which creates room for reason and rationality. Yosef Lapid's writings of the third debate however became a touchstone of variety of theoretical and methodological debates in the field. The third debate on the prospects of international theory in a post positivist era generated quite a buzz about the potential contributions of variety of alternative approaches to International studies and generated a rather introspective moment in the field, Lapid in his article questioned the foundations and directions of the field in the post cold war era. He managed to amalgamate the narrative of previous great debates and called for more pluralism and diversity in the field.
Although he managed to create diversity and openness in the field but made the possibility of a consensus more complex and difficult to comprehend for a common individual. There is no doubt with regards to the academic authenticity of his work but complexity and depth of his article have led to criticisms regarding the understanding of his work and have led to differing explanation and reviews which also fails to coincide at many instances.
Yes its true. Not everything can be tested or interpreted in numbers.
ReplyDelete