ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI

Erdem Özlük

TR EN

ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI

Abstract

Uluslararası İlişkiler disiplini sosyal bilimlerdeki diğer disiplinlere göre oldukça yeni olmasına rağmen zengin bir teorik alt yapıya sahiptir. Disiplinin bir asırlık tarihinde patlak vermişüç büyük tartışma vardır. Bu tartışmalardan ikincisi olan Gelenekselcilik Davranışsalcılık tartışmasıdisipline hem özerlik kazandırmışhem de disiplinin daha bilimsel bir kılıfa bürünmesi anlamında önemli katkılarda bulunmuştur. Ancak ikinci büyük tartışmada Davranışsalcılığın oynadığırol özellikle Türkçe literatürde hep ihmal edilmişve bu konuda genişçaplıçalışmalar yapılmamıştır. Disiplinde metodolojik bir devrim gerçekleştirerek disipline özerkliğini kazandıran, dışpolitika analizi başta olmak üzere, karar alma yaklaşımı, oyun teorileri, sistem yaklaşımı, içerik analizi, veri derleme/toplama, simülasyon ve daha birçok başlıkta epistemik ve metodolojik açılımlar sağlamışolan Davranışsalcılığın en büyük katkılarından biri de çatışma çözümlemesidir. Bir savaşın ürünü olan disiplinin en temel kaygısı, benzer savaşve çatışmalarıönlemektir. Davranışsalcıparadigmanın ışığıaltında, geleneksel yol ve yöntemlerin dışında alternatif bir bakışaçısıile çatışma çözümlemesi çalışmaları1950’lerin başından bugüne değin disiplinin en gözde alanlarından biri olmuştur.

Keywords

Uluslararası İlişkiler Disiplini,Gelenekselcilik,Davranışsalcılık,İkinci Büyük Tartışma,Çatışma Çözümlemesi

References

____ “An Editorial”. (1957). The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 1, No. 1.
_____“Approaches to the Study of Social Conflict: Introduction by the Editors”. (1957). The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 1, No. 2.
Alexander, Franz. et al. (1956). “Editorial: Behavioral Science, A New Journal”, Behavioral Science, Vol. 1, No. 1.
Angell, Robert C. David J., Singer. (1964). “Comparison of the Findings of the Two Studies”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 8, No. 4.
Armstrong, David. (2003). “A Turbulent World: An Uncertain International Relations”, Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol. 6, No. 4.
Ashley, Richard. (1984). “The Poverty of Neorealism”, International Organization, Vol. 38, No. 2.
Bennett Scott D. Allan C. Stam. (2000). “A Universal Test of an Expected Utility Theory of War”, International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 44.
Boulding, Kenneth E. (1957). “Organization and Conflict”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 1, No. 2.
Boulding, Kenneth E. (1958). “Theoretical Systems and Political Realities: A Review of Morton A. Kaplan, System and Process in International Politics”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 2, No. 4.
Boulding, Kenneth E. (1959). “National Images and International Systems”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 3, No. 2.

Bremer, Stuart A., et al. (1992). “The Scientific Study of War: A Learning Package”, John Vasquez, Marie T. Henehan, (ed), The Scientific Study of Peace and War: A Text Reader, Maryland: Lexington Books.
Bremer, Stuart A., et al. (2003). “Building A Science of World Politics”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution”, Vol. 47, No. 1.
Brown, Chris. (1992). International Relations Theory: New Normative Approaches, New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Brown, Chris. (2000). “International Political Theory A British Social Science”, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Vol. 2, No. 1.
Çalış, Şaban. Erdem Özlük. (2006). “Uluslararası Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları”, Şaban Çalış, et al., (ed.), Uluslararası Örgütler ve Türkiye, Konya: Çizgi Kitabevi.
Cox, Richard. (1962). “The Role of Political Philosophy in the Theory of International Relations”, Social Research, Vol. 29, No. 3.
Dando, Malcolm. (1994). “The Management of International Conflict” American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 38, No. 1.
Denemark, Robert A. (1999). “World System History: From Traditional International Politics to the Study of Global Relations”, International Studies Review, Vol. 1, No. 2.
Deutsch, Karl W. (1957). “Mass Communications and the Loss of Freedom in National Decision-Making: A Possible Research Approach to Interstate Conflicts”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 1, No. 2.
Deutsch, Karl W. (1970). “Quincy Wright’s Contribution to the Study of War: A Preface to the Second Edition”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 14, No. 4.
Dougherty, James E., Robert L. Pfaltzgraff. (1981). Contending Theories of International Relations, New York: Harper Row Publishers.
Fagen, Richard R. (1957). “The Behavioral Scientist and International Relations”, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 4, No. 8.
Friedman, Michael. (2002). “Kant, Kuhn and the Rationality of Science”, Philosophy of Science, Vol. 69, 2002.
Frost, Mervyn. (1986). Towards A Normative Theory of International Relations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hamblin, Robert L. et al. (1977). “Arms Races: A Test of Two Models”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 42.
Hayes, Brian. (2002). “Statistic of Deadly Quarrels”, Computing Science, Vol. 90, No. 1.
Hill, Kim Q. (1978). “Domestic Politics, International Linkages, and Military Expenditures” Studies in Comparative International Development, Vol. 13, No.1.
Holsti, Kalevi J. (1966). “Resolving International Conflicts: A Taxonomy of Behavior and Some Figures on Procedures”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 10, No. 3.
Holsti, Kalevi J. (1971). “Retreat from Utopia: International Relations Theory, 1945-70”, Canadian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 4, No. 2.
Holsti, Kalevi J. (1981). International Politics: A Framework for Analysis, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Hunt, J. C. R. (1998). “Lewis Fry Richardson and His Contributions to Mathematics, Meteorology and Models of Conflict”, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 30.
Intriligator, Michael D. (1982). “Research on Conflict Theory: Analytic Approaches and Areas of Application”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 26, No. 2.
Jervis, Robert. (1991). “Models and Cases in the Study of International Conflict”, Robert L. Rothstein, (ed.), The Evolution of Theory in International Relations, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press.
Kaplan, Morton A. (1958). “Toward A Theory of International Politics: Quincy Wright's Study of International Relations and Some Recent Developments”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 2, No. 4.
Kaplan, Morton A. (1974). “Systems Theory and Objectivity”, Theory and Decision, Vol. 5, No. 4.
Kindsella, David. Bruce Russett. (2002). “Conflict Emergence and Escalation in Interactive Dydas”, The Journal of Politics, Vol. 64, No. 4.
Kotsch, William J. (1965). “An Arithmetic Approach to International Relations”, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 9, No. 2.
Kuhn, Thomas. (2003). Bilimsel Devrimlerin Yapısı, Çev. Nilüfer Kuyaş, İstanbul: Alan Yayıncılık.
Kvasz, Ladislav. (1999). “On Classification of Scientific Revolutions”, Journal of General Philosophy of Science, Vol. 30.
Lane, Ruth. (1996). “Positivism, Scientific Realism and Political Science”, Journal of Theoretical Politics, Vol. 8, No. 3.
Linklater, Andrew. (1990). Men and the Citizens in the Theory of International Relations, London: Macmillan.
Little, Richard. (1978). “A Systems Approach”, Trevor Taylor, (ed), Approaches and Theory in International Relations, New York: Longman.
Long, David. (2005). “C. A. W. Manning and the Discipline of International Relations”, Round Table, Vol. 94, No. 1.
Mack, Raymond W. Richard C. Snyder. (1957). “The Analysis of Social Conflict Toward an Overview and Synthesis”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 1, No. 2.
Majeski, Stephen J., David J. Sylvan. (1984). “Simple Choices and Complex Calculations: A Critique of the War Trap”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 28, No. 2.
Mayer, Ernst. (1994). “The Advance of Science and Scientific Revolutions”, Journal of the History of the Behavioral Science, Vol. 30.
McClelland, Charles A. (1963). “Unmanaged Weapons and the Calculated Control of International Politics”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 7, No. 3.
McClelland, Charles. (1959). “A Classification of International Relations Theory”, Political Research, Organization and Design, Vol. 2, No. 4.
McGinnis, Michael D. (1991). “Richardson, Rationality and Restrictive Models of Arms Races”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 35, No. 3.
Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de. (1987). “Conceptualizing War: A Reply”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 31, No. 2.
Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de. (1998). “The End of the Cold War: Predicting an Emergent Property”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 42, No. 2.
Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de. James D. Morrow. (1997). “Capabilities, Perception and Escalation”, American Political Science Review”, Vol. 91, No. 1.
Monroe, Kristen R. (2001). “Paradigm Shift: From Rational Choice to Perspective”, International Political Science Review, Vol. 22, No. 2.
Neufeld, Mark. (1990). Toward a Restructuring of International Relations Theory, Carleton University: Unpublished PhD Thesis.
Newcombe, Hanna. Alan Newcombe. (1969). Peace Research Around the World, Oakville: Canadian Peace Research Institute.
Nicholson, Michael. (1987). “The Conceptual Bases of the War Trap”, The
Nicholson, Michael. (2000). “What’s the Use of International Relations”, Review of International Studies, Vol. 26.
Olson, William C. A. J. R. Groom. (1991). International Relations Then and Now: Origins and Trends in Interpretation, London: HarperCollins Academic.
Özlük, Erdem. (2005). “Şiddetle Damgalı Bir Asır”, Radikal Gazetesi, 4 Ağustos.
Park, Tong W. (1972). “The Role of Distance in International Relations: A New Look at the Social Field Theory”, Behavioral Science, Vol. 17, No. 4.
Patomaki, Heikki. (2001). After International Relations: Critical Realism and the ReConstruction of World Politics, London: Routledge.
Platig, Raymond E. (1969). “International Relations As A Field of Inquiry”, International Politics and Foreign Policy, ed., James Rosenau, New York: The Free Press.
Rapoport, Anatol. (1957). “Lewis F. Richardson’s Mathematical Theory of War”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 1, No. 3.
Revilla, Claudio Cioffi. (1990). The Scientific Measurement of International Conflict: Handbook of Datasets on Crises and Wars 1495-1988, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Reynolds, Charles. (1973). Theory and Explanation in International Politics, London: Martin Robertson Publishing.
Riggs, Fred W. (1967). “The Theory of Political Development”, James C. Charlesworth, (ed), Contemporary Political Analysis, New York: The Free Press.
Rummel, Rudolph J. (1966). “Some Dimensions in the Foreign Behavior of Nations”, The Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 3, No. 1.
Rummel, Rudolph J. (1967). “Dimensions of Dyadic War, 1820-1952”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 11, No. 2.
Rummel, Rudolph J. (1979). Understanding Conflict and War Vol. 4 War, Power, Peace, California: Sage Publications.
Schafer, Mark. (2003). “Science, Empiricism and Tolerance in the Study of Foreign Policymaking”, International Studies Review, Vol. 5.
Schmidt, Brian C. (2002). “On the History and Historiography of International Relations”, W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse, B.A. Simmons, (ed), Handbook of International Relations, London: Sage Publications.
Schwab, Joseph J. (1960). “What Do Scientists Do?”, Behavioral Science, Vol. 5, No. 1.
Scott, Andrew M. (1958). “A Challenge-Response Theory of International Relations”, Political Research, Organization and Design, Vol. 1, No. 4.
Shapiro, Ian. Alexander Wendt. (1992). “The Difference that Realism Makes: Social Science and the Politics of Consent”, Politics and Society, Vol. 20, No. 2.
Singer David J. (1964). “Soviet and American Foreign Policy Attitudes: Content Analysis of Elite Articulations”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 8, No. 4.
Singer, David J. (1960). “The Geography of Conflict: Introduction”, The
Singer, David J. (1960). “Theorizing About Theory in International Politics”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 4, No. 4.
Singer, David J. (1961). “The Relevance of the Behavioral Sciences to the Study of International Relations”, Behavioral Science, Vol. 6, No. 4.
Singer, David J. (1965). “Data-Making in International Relations”, Behavioral Science, Vol. 10, No. 1.
Singer, David J. (1970). “From A Study of War to Peace Research: Some Criteria and Strategies”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 14, No. 4.
Singer, David J. (1990). “Variables, Indicator, and Data: The Measurement Problem in Macropolitical Research”, David J. Singer, Paul F Diehl, (ed), Measuring the Correlates of War, Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
Singer, David J. Daniel S. Geller. (1998). Nations At War: A Scientific Study of International Conflict, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smoker, Paul. (1964). “Fear in the Arms Race: A Mathematical Study”, The Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 1, No. 3.
Spegele, Roger D. (1996). Political Realism in International Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Spiro, Herbert J. (1967). “An Evaluation of Systems Theory”, James C. Charlesworth, (ed), Contemporary Political Analysis, New York: The Free Press.
Sprinz, Detlef F. Yael W. Nahmias. (2004). Models, Numbers and Cases: Methods for Studying International Relations, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Stoll, Richard J. (1982). “Let the Researcher Beware: The Use of the Richardson Equations to Estimate the Parameters of a Dyadic Arms Acquisition Process”, American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 26, No. 1.
Tanrısever, Oktay. (2000). “Yöntem Sorunu: Gelenekselcilik Davranışsalcılık Tartışması”, Atila Eralp, (ed), Devlet Sistem ve Kimlik: Uluslararası İlişkilerde Temel Yaklaşımlar, İletişim Yayınları: İstanbul.
Tanter, Raymond. James N. Rosenau. (1970). “Field and Environmental Approaches to World Politics: Implications for Data Archives”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 14, No. 4.
Thompson, Kenneth W. (1958). “Theory-Making in International Politics”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution”, Vol. 2, No. 2.
Thompson, Kenneth W. (1970). “Policy and Theory in Quincy Wright’s International Relations”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 14, No. 4.
Tickner, Ann. (2005). “Gendering a Discipline: Some Feminist Methodological Contributions to International Relations”, Signs, Vol. 30, No. 4.
Vasquez, John A. (1999). Power of Power Politics: From Classical Realism to Neotraditionalism, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Vincent, Jack E. (1983). International Relations: Volume 4: Theory, London: University Press of America.
Waldo, Dwight. (1956). Political Science in the United States of America: A Trend Report, Paris: Unesco.
Wallace, Michael D. (1979). “Arms Races and Escalation”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 23, No. 1.
Wandycz, Piotr S. (1955). “The Theory of International Relations”, Review of Politics, Vol. 17, No. 2.
Webb, Keith. (1994). “Academics and Practitioners: Power, Knowledge and Role”, Michel Girard, et al., (ed), Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy Making: National Perspectives on Academics and Professionals in International Relations, London: Pinter Publishers.
Wendt, Alexander. (1998). “On Constitution and Causation in”, Review of International Studies, Vol. 24, No. 5.
Wolfers, Arnold. (1947). “International Relations as a Field of Study”, Columbia Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 1, No. 1.
Wright, Quincy. (1951). “The Nature of Conflict”, Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 4, No. 4, 1951.
Wright, Quincy. (1955). “International Organization and Peace”, Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 1.
Wright, Quincy. (1957). “Design for a Research Project on International Conflicts and the Factors Causing Their Aggravation or Amelioration”, Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 2.
Wright, Quincy. (1957). “The Value for Conflict Resolution of A General Discipline of International Relations”, Conflict Resolution, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1957.
Wright, Quincy. (1965). “The Escalation of International Conflicts”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 9, No. 4.
Wright, Quincy. (1969). “The Form of A Discipline of International Relations”, James Rosenau, (ed), International Politics and Foreign Policy, New York: The Free Press.

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

-

Journal Section

-

Authors

Erdem Özlük This is me

Publication Date

February 1, 2008

Submission Date

-

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 2008 Number: 19

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA28GW68YU

APA

Özlük, E. (2008). ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 19, 375-394. https://izlik.org/JA28GW68YU

AMA

1.Özlük E. ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI. SUSBED. 2008;(19):375-394. https://izlik.org/JA28GW68YU

Chicago

Özlük, Erdem. 2008. “ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI”. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, nos. 19: 375-94. https://izlik.org/JA28GW68YU.

EndNote

Özlük E (February 1, 2008) ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 19 375–394.

IEEE

[1]E. Özlük, “ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI”, SUSBED, no. 19, pp. 375–394, Feb. 2008, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA28GW68YU

ISNAD

Özlük, Erdem. “ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI”. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 19 (February 1, 2008): 375-394. https://izlik.org/JA28GW68YU.

JAMA

1.Özlük E. ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI. SUSBED. 2008;:375–394.

MLA

Özlük, Erdem. “ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI”. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, no. 19, Feb. 2008, pp. 375-94, https://izlik.org/JA28GW68YU.

Vancouver

1.Erdem Özlük. ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI. SUSBED [Internet]. 2008 Feb. 1;(19):375-94. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA28GW68YU

24108 28027

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER DİSİPLİNİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCI PARADİGMANIN ANLAMI, KÖKENİVE ÇATIŞMA ÇÖZÜMLEMESİÖRNEĞİNDE DAVRANIŞSALCILIĞIN KATKISI

Abstract

Keywords

Abstract

Keywords

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

IZ

Cite