Rival Visions of Parsimony

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 707-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seva Gunitsky

Abstract“Parsimony” is a vague and divisive concept in political science. I identify three distinct but often conflated conceptions of parsimony. The aesthetic conception emphasizes a theory's elegance and clarity; the ontological conception, drawing upon the hard sciences, posits that the world is governed by simple fundamental laws. Neither applies in international relations theory or to social science more broadly. Instead, only the epistemological conception—abstracting from reality to highlight recurring patterns and build testable propositions—justifies parsimony. This view is not a naive simplification of the world but a self-conscious capitulation to its complexity. Though both critics and supporters of parsimony often do not distinguish among these three “visions,” doing so has important implications for how we think about evaluating theories.

Author(s):  
Steve Smith

This text argues that theory is central to explaining International Relations (IR) and that the discipline of IR is much more relevant to the world of international relations than it has been at any point in its history. Some chapters cover distinct IR theories ranging from realism/structural realism to liberalism/neoliberalism, the English school, constructivism, Marxism, critical theory, feminism, poststructuralism, green theory, and postcolonialism. Oher chapters explore International Relations theory and its relationship to social science, normative theory, globalization, and the discipline’s identity. This introduction explains why this edition has chosen to cover these theories, reflects on international theory and its relationship to the world, and considers the kind of assumptions about theory that underlie each of the approaches.


Author(s):  
Steve Smith

This text argues that theory is central to explaining International Relations (IR) and that the discipline of IR is much more relevant to the world of international relations than it has been at any point in its history. Some chapters cover distinct IR theories ranging from realism/structural realism to liberalism/neoliberalism, the English school, constructivism, Marxism, critical theory, feminism, poststructuralism, green theory, and postcolonialism. Oher chapters explore International Relations theory and its relationship to social science, normative theory, globalization, and the discipline's identity. This introduction explains why this edition has chosen to cover these theories, reflects on international theory and its relationship to the world, and considers the kind of assumptions about theory that underlie each of the approaches.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Stevens

This thematic issue advocates a range of novel theoretical and methodological directions applicable to cybersecurity studies. Drawing on critical International Relations theory, Science and Technology Studies, participant observation, quantitative political science, and other social science methods and theory, the contributors advance modes of invigorating the exploration of cybersecurity as an assemblage of sociotechnical practices. In so doing, this issue seeks to enhance understanding of the politics and strategies of cybersecurity, one of the most complex and diverse technical and political challenges of our contemporary world.


Author(s):  
Leonard V. Smith

We have long known that the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 “failed” in the sense that it did not prevent the outbreak of World War II. This book investigates not whether the conference succeeded or failed, but the historically specific international system it created. It explores the rules under which that system operated, and the kinds of states and empires that inhabited it. Deepening the dialogue between history and international relations theory makes it possible to think about sovereignty at the conference in new ways. Sovereignty in 1919 was about remaking “the world”—not just determining of answers demarcating the international system, but also the questions. Most histories of the Paris Peace Conference stop with the signing of the Treaty of Versailles with Germany on June 28, 1919. This book considers all five treaties produced by the conference as well as the Treaty of Lausanne with Turkey in 1923. It is organized not chronologically or geographically, but according to specific problems of sovereignty. A peace based on “justice” produced a criminalized Great Power in Germany, and a template problematically applied in the other treaties. The conference as sovereign sought to “unmix” lands and peoples in the defeated multinational empires by drawing boundaries and defining ethnicities. It sought less to oppose revolution than to instrumentalize it. The League of Nations, so often taken as the supreme symbol of the conference’s failure, is better considered as a continuation of the laboratory of sovereignty established in Paris.


2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 681-711 ◽  
Author(s):  
NICOLAS GUILHOT

In the disciplines of political science and international relations, Machiavelli is unanimously considered to be “the first modern realist.” This essay argues that the idea of a realist tradition going from the Renaissance to postwar realism founders when one considers the disrepute of Machiavelli among early international relations theorists. It suggests that the transformation of Machiavelli into a realist thinker took place subsequently, when new historical scholarship, informed by strategic and political considerations related to the transformation of the US into a global power, generated a new picture of the Renaissance. Focusing on the work of Felix Gilbert, and in particular hisMachiavelli and Guicciardini, the essay shows how this new interpretation of Machiavelli was shaped by the crisis of the 1930s, the emergence of security studies, and the philanthropic sponsorship of international relations theory.


Author(s):  
Anna М. Solarz

The 2015 immigration crisis revealed the weak cultural condition Europe finds itself in, given the adoption by a majority of states of a model for development that deliberately severs ties with common civilisational roots. However, while Poles do not really nurture prejudices against either Islam or immigrants, a decided majority of them voiced their unwillingness to accept new (mainly Muslim) arrivals, in the context of a solution to the above crisis the EU was intending to impose. A change of policy was thus forced upon the Union by Poland and other CEECs, given the latter’s strong guiding conviction that pursuit of a multicultural ideology leads to a weakening – rather than any improvement – in the condition of culture in Europe, and hence to a sapping of the continent’s power in the international relations sphere. As the crisis has made clear, the EU will probably have to start taking more account of preferences in this part of Europe. This means opportunities for the political science of religion to research the likelihood of a return to the Christian component of European identity, as well as the role this might play in improving the cultural condition of this part of the world.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Sangbum Shin

ABSTRACT This article describes a project-based course titled “International Relations and Games” in which students were required to create game rules and scenarios using IR concepts, theories, approaches, and topics. Although students learned through participation in games and simulations in previous classes, they acquired further knowledge by developing their own games—a case of “learning by creating.” The course was designed with expectations that (1) game-creation activities would facilitate peer-based and self-directed learning; (2) it would help improve students’ creativity; and (3) it would enable students to understand the importance and utility of discipline in the world beyond their classroom. Students conducted three game-creation projects in the semester. Based on the instructor’s observations, student surveys, and personal-interview results, it is concluded that all three expectations were met—especially that students felt as if they were leading the class.


Author(s):  
Hugh Dyer

Changes in the environment can impact international relations theory, despite enjoying only a limited amount of attention from scholars of the discipline. The sorts of influence that may be identified include ontology, epistemology, concepts, and methods, all of these being related to varying perspectives on international relations. It is likely that the most profound implications arise at the ontological level, since this establishes assumptions about, for example, whether the world we wish to understand is both political and ecological. However, more recently the recognition of the practical challenge presented by the environment has become widespread, though it has not yet translated into a significant impact on the discipline of international relations, even when theoretical implications are noted. It is now almost obligatory to include the environment in any list of modern international relations concerns, as over time it has become necessary to include peace, underdevelopment, gender, or race, as they quite rightly became recognized as significant aspects of the field. Moreover, the environment, as a relatively novel subject matter, has naturally brought some critique and innovation to the field. However, studies of the environment are also subject to such descriptors as “mainstream” and “radical” in debates about how best to tackle the subject. As is often the case, the debates are sharpest among those with the greatest interest in the subject.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document