Sunday, February 8, 2015

Session 4 - Classical or Scientific Approach?

International relations theory is the study of international relations from a theoretical perspective and can be addressed using classical and scientific approaches. The classical approaches were informed by history, law, philosophy and value judgment while the latter is based on the principles of mathematics and analysis.

It appears that the initial study of international relations had much emphasis on the conceptual elements rather than the explanatory ones. Thus, it is only fair to assert that the classical approach opened the gates to the study of scientific methods of studying international relations. However, the question remains as to which one provides with the legitimate explanation of studying the field?

The scientific approach has contributed to a greater extent to the field by using generalization and 
prediction theories to explain certain events. However, I do not accept the idea that scientific methods can allow us to provide explanations as it does in the natural science. These arguments are not valid through time and space. On the other end, as classical approach maintains, international relations is the product of social and historical actions that  people have encountered in the past and cannot be confirmed or falsified as scientific approach maintains.

However, it is difficult to give an objective answer as to which one of the approach should be adapted in the study of IR as both have some negative and positive aspects. Thus, it is only sensible to come up with comprehensive approach incorporating both school of thoughts since they have common practices, norms, principles and rules, making it difficult for the approaches to be separated from one another. Nevertheless, the degree of the merger is yet to be determined by experts in the field.  

3 comments:

  1. I highly agree with taking the middle ground on this issue as well. It is foolish to reduce human action to mere statistic and data figures and mere generalizations, but since this data can help us come up with patterns and then policies, the scientific method is social sciences is not completely useless either. The history of social sciences shows that the dominance of methods is arguably cyclical in nature. In the future, though, hopefully a compatible mixture can be introduced that can help optimize the methodology used.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The question of legitimacy of approach also occurred to me while I was going through the article. On one hand theorizing can be absolutely abstract, and needs some sort of empirical measurement - or rather structure and codification. On the other, the discipline cannot be left completely to statistics and numbers with an utter disregard for analysis of history, philosophy, thoughts and ideas. Therefore, a mixed methods approach seems most suitable.
    Another interesting aspect of your post was your reference to 'the degree of the merger'. It will be worthy to note how the debate over theorizing evolves to give way to the mixed methods approach and how well mixed the two methods are if ever a consensus on theorizing is reached.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I generally agree with your assessment along with the astute comments. I also want to add that I don't think there will ever be a consensus on the best methodological approach to studying IR. Instead I think there will continue to be a proliferation of methods, which hopefully will help us better understand international relations.

    ReplyDelete