International Relations And Scientific Progress

International Relations and Scientific Progress argues that a theory focusing on the structure of the international system may explain a wider and more interesting range of events in world politics than other alternatives. The first part of the book assesses the meaning of progress in the discipline of international relations, a process that culminates in the creation of a new concept, the scientific research enterprise. The second part review structural realism within that context and makes the case for an elaboration of structural realism by showing that a system-level theory based on structure could have great unrealized explanatory potential. The third part explores new directions, most notably as related to empirical testing of an elaborated version of structural realism that focuses on both continuity and change in the international system. Patrick James is professor of political science at the University of Missouri.

Realism is one of the core theories within the field of international relations, and it generally posits a state system characterized by anarchy where states act in what they perceive to be their own self interests. It is a controversial theory, and it has many opponents. Yet effective debate among realists and those who identify with other schools of thought has diminished dramatically over time. As Patrick James argues in Realism and International Relations, scholars in the field have become dissatisfied with results from exchanges in words alone. He contends that translation of the vast amount of information in the field into knowledge requires a greater emphasis on communication beyond the use of text. Given the challenges posed by existing and intensifying information overload, he develops a new model that relies on the graphic representation of analytical arguments. As James explains, realist scholarship in the post-World War II era is the natural domain for the application of systemism, a graphic form of expression with straightforward rules for portrayal of analytical arguments, notably cause and effect within theories. Systemism goes beyond prior iterations of systems theory to offer a visualization technique borrowed and adapted from the philosophy of science. Systemist graphics reveal the shortcomings, contributions and potential of realism. These visualizations, which focus on realist theories about war, are intended to bring order out of what critics tend to describe, with some justification, as chaos. In sum, a graphic turn for realism in particular and international relations in general is essential in order to achieve the scientific progress that otherwise is likely to remain elusive. A major theoretical work by an eminent scholar, this will be of interest to all theorists focusing how the international system of states actually functions.

All academic disciplines periodically appraise their effectiveness, evaluating the progress of previous scholarship and judging which approaches are useful and which are not. Although no field could survive if it did nothing but appraise its progress, occasional appraisals are important and if done well can help advance the field. This book investigates how international relations theorists can better equip themselves to determine the state of scholarly work in their field. It takes as its starting point Imre Lakatos's influential theory of scientific change, and in particular his methodology of scientific research programs (MSRP). It uses MSRP to organize its analysis of major research programs over the last several decades and uses MSRP's criteria for theoretical progress to evaluate these programs. The contributors appraise the progress of institutional theory, varieties of realist and liberal theory, operational code analysis, and other research programs in international relations. Their analyses reveal the strengths and limits of Lakatosian criteria and the need for metatheoretical metrics for evaluating scientific progress.

Bridges and Boundaries offers a conversation between what might loosely be described as traditionalist diplomatic and military historians, and political scientists who employ qualitative case study methods to examine international relations. The book opens with a series of chapters discussing differences, commonalities, and opportunities for cross-fertilization between the two disciplines.To help focus the dialogue on real events and research, the volume then revisits three empirical topics that have been studied at length by members of both disciplines: British hegemony in the nineteenth century; diplomacy in the interwar period and the causes of World War II; and the origins and course of the Cold War. For each of these subjects, a political scientist, a historian, and a commentator reflect on how disciplinary "guild rules" have shaped the study of international events. The book closes with incisive overviews by Robert Jervis and Paul W. Schroeder. Bridges and Boundaries explores how historians and political scientists can learn from one another and illustrates the possibilities that arise when open-minded scholars from different disciplines sit down to talk.

Jack Snyder is a leading American international relations scholar with an international reputation for his research on IR theory and US Foreign policy. This book collects many of his most important essays into a single volume. Exploring a liberal realist theory of international politics, the book is arranged around three key subject areas: Anarchy and Its Effects The Challenges of Democratic Consolidation Empire and the Promotion of a Liberal Order With a new introduction to frame the selected essays, this collection examines how developing nations evolve political systems, and fit into a world dominated by liberal-democracies. It looks to the future for the current dominant powers in a changing world of international relations and at the challenges to their leadership. Featuring a new conclusion, developed from the assembled chapters, this is a fascinating and vital collection of scholarship from one of the most influential theorists of his generation. Power and Progress is an invaluable text for students and scholars of international relations, and those interested in the debates on liberalism and realism, and comparative politics.

International Relations and Scientific Progress contends that a theory focusing on the structure of the international system explains a wider and more interesting range of events in world politics than other theories. Such theorizing appears to be out of favor as the result of the apparent failure by structural realism, the most prominent system-level theory over the last two decades, on any number of fronts--most notably an inability to anticipate the ending of the Cold War and its aftermath. This new book is put forward as the most comprehensive and innovative theoretical work on paradigms in international relations since the publication of Theory of International Politics, which created structural realism, more than two decades ago. With appropriate revisions, however, structural realist theory can compete effectively and reclaim its primacy. The first part of International Relations and Scientific Progress assesses the meaning of progress in the discipline of international relations, a process that culminates in the creation of a new concept, the scientific research enterprise. The second part reviews structural realism within that context and identifies a lack of connection between theory and research that links power-based indicators to international conflict, crisis, and war. This part of the book makes the case for an elaboration of structural realism by showing that a system-level theory based on structure has great unrealized explanatory potential. By comparison, the current overwhelmingly research oriented agenda on state dyads imposes severe limitations on understanding that are not currently appreciated. Part Three sums up the work and explores new directions, most notablyas related to empirical testing of an elaborated version of structural realism that focuses on both continuity and change in the international system.

Explanation and Progress in Security Studies asks why Security Studies, as a central area of International Relations, has not experienced scientific progress in the way natural sciences have—and answers by arguing that the underlying reason is that scholars in Security Studies have advanced a range of different notions of "explanation" or different criteria of "explanatory superiority" to show that their positions are better than rival positions. To demonstrate this, the author engages in in-depth content analysis of the generally recognized exemplars of explanation and explanatory superiority in three of the core debates in the disciplines: Why do states pursue policies of nuclear proliferation? Why do states choose to form the alliances they do? And why do liberal democratic states behave the way they do toward other liberal democracies? The book reveals that authors in the debates that have shown the most progress use similar criteria in arguing for and against the key explanations. In the nuclear proliferation debate, there is wide divergence in the criteria the most visible authors use, and there is wide divergence in the explanations offered. In the alliance formation/balance-of-power debate, there is some overlap of criteria the most important authors use, and there has been some limited movement toward consensus. In the democratic peace debate there has been much more overlap of criteria the most prominent authors use, and there is agreement on both some positive and negative conclusions.

This edited volume offers a systematic evaluation of how knowledge is produced by scholarly research into International Relations. The contributors explore three key questions: To what extent is scientific progress and accumulation of knowledge possible? What are the different accounts of how this process takes place? And what are the dominant critiques of these understandings? It is the first publication to survey the full range of perspectives available for evaluating scientific progress as well as dominant critiques of scientism. In its second part, the volume applies this range of perspectives to the research program on the democratic peace. It shows what we gain by accommodating and enabling dialogue among the full range of epistemological approaches. The contributors elaborate and defend the epistemological position of sociable pluralism as one that seeks to build bridges between soft positivism, critical theory, and critical realism. The underlying idea is that if the differences between the various approaches used by different communities of researchers can be understood more clearly, this will facilitate meaningful cross-cutting communication, dialogue, and debate and thereby enable us to address real-world problems more effectively. This timely and original work will be of great interest to advanced-level students and scholars dealing with philosophy of science and methodological questions in International Relations.