Alıhough its subjcct mattcr covcrs dccisions and pratiqucs whose
dircct or indirect influcncc on thc livcs of statcs, countries and thcreforc,
individuals cannot bc neglectcd, thc study of intcrnational Relations (IR) has
yet failcd to achicvc a status of proper scicncc. This essay inquires the
relative position of thc disciplinc versus general social thcory, its
comparative povcrty in thc cpistcmological1
and mcthodological altcrnative
approachcs and poses the question vvhether this povcrty is an outeome of the
thcorctical povcrty; or more concisely, thc domination of the disciplinc by
onc single paradigm for half a ccntury: Rcalism. So far, thc study contends,
thc political and social milicu in vvhich intcrnational Relations has developed
as an acadcmic pursuit, vvas not sufficiently ripe for a compctition of
theoretical pcrspcclivcs. Thc occurrcnccs of the last tvvo dccadcs in thc ficld
have refleeted on the pcrception and conccptuali/.ation of statcs' relations vvilh
cach other and on a plethora of thcorctical approachcs the basic tenet of vvhich
is an opposilion to ıhc posilivist orienied realist thcory of IR.
Primary Language | Turkish |
---|---|
Subjects | Political Science |
Journal Section | Research Article |
Authors | |
Publication Date | May 1, 1995 |
Published in Issue | Year 1995 Issue: 25 |