Post-positivist Theory: Can The Debates Be Justified When There is Real Conflict?

This essay hasn't yet been marked by one of our teachers

You can view 3 essays on Social Theory that have been Marked by Teachers

The first 200 words of this essay...

Post-positivist Theory: Can The Debates Be Justified When There is Real Conflict?

For: Prof. Rick Fawn

By: Bryan Watson

Course: EC5999 - International Security Studies

Due: December 12, 2003

Word Count: 2,606

Theories in international relations are debated constantly. This is partially due to the plethora of schools of thought about the subject that exist, ranging from realism to positivism and beyond. The two schools of thought that will be concentrated on here are the positivist and the post-positivist, the latter springing from a rejection of the assumptions of the former. There is a constant debate not only between these two schools, but also within the post-positivist school of thought itself, about what is correct theory for international relations. Debates about theory, it will be shown in this paper, are valuable, but the theories that are debated must, to prove worth the effort, be grounded solidly in reality. It is this qualification, that of being judged by the standard of applicability to reality, that post-positivist theories fail to meet, and because of this invalidate themselves, in the mind of the author of this paper, from being worth debating when real conflicts exist.

Theories: