Session 3 - How not to be Lakatos Intolerant

In their article, Colin Elman and Miriam Fendius Elman, aim to present a detailed account of Imre Lakatos’ Methodology of Scientific Research Programs (MSRP) approach to IR theory which includes how it emerged along with its strengths and weaknesses. Through this the authors attempt to convey that the study of meta theory is significant as it allows IR scientists to critically evaluate the various theories that exist and develop new and improved theories.

The authors thoroughly explain the various elements of Lakatos’ theory on IR theory appraisal. Along with this, they find fault in the way many scientists have often used ‘incomplete or misleading accounts of the metatheory’ which results in incomprehensive analysis. They have also highlighted some ambiguities within Lakatos’ theory itself.  The definitional problem of the concept of ‘novelty’ is a good example of this. Although they believe that the MSRP theory has its weaknesses, Elman & Elman bring forth its strengths which make it sufficient for meta theoretical analysis.

I was particularly intrigued, not by Lakatos’ MSRP theory, but by the way the authors have carefully provided a detailed description of the difficulties faced by IR scientists while performing meta theoretical analysis. They have managed to highlight various obstacles along with lengthy criticisms and advantages of the MSRP theory. As a student new to the field of IR, this article posed as an eye opener to the fact that IR is more than just a study of state relations. Instead, it is a scientific field, rich with debates on how analysis should be conducted, similar to other fields, like psychology or physics. The article also makes one appreciate the work of philosophers such as Kuhn, Popper and Lakatos as there are already sturdy frameworks which provide stepping stones for new comers to build their analysis on.