Hedley Bull, in his article points out the two approaches to
the theory of international relations where the classical approach is based on
intuition and relies upon exercise of judgment while on the other hand,
scientific approach is based on evidence and proofs through the construction of
mathematical models etc. to verify any kind of hypothesis.
Naturally, the scientific approach does make sense as one
could argue that theory is not a theory and just a hypothesis unless proven.
Thus the need to present evidence along with any kind of hypothesis which
applies in the international arena. However, the article points out how the scientific
approach has not been as effective as it would have liked to be and has only
resulted in complicating things when talking about International Relations. One
of the most interesting points against the scientific approach was the “fetish
for measurement” and the unnecessary need for constructions of mathematical
models since the classical researchers believe in intuitions and hold the
assumption that proofs and verification are a constraint which no longer allow
researchers to contribute significantly to the theories of international
relations.
That being said, the most obvious and appealing method is to
use a combination of these two
methods which satisfies both sets of
researchers. Both approaches have their own strengths and weaknesses, therefore
both of these methods used together will make the experimental design of any
research stronger, enabling researchers to contribute more significantly and holistically
to the field.
I do not entirely agree that " the scientific approach does make sense as one could argue that theory is not a theory and just a hypothesis unless proven" because many central questions in IR cannot be answered objectively primarily because they rely on our capacity of judgement and perception which cannot be quantified. The fusion of both techniques, nevertheless will contribute holistically to the field.
ReplyDeleteI like that more people are arguing for a mixed methods approach. However, as the field has drifted towards more empiricism, less qualitative approaches are accepted. Yet qualitative methods are critical, especially when it is impossible to objectively measure the value of items in the social world.
ReplyDelete