Theory And Evidence In Comparative Politics And International Relations

Features

Description

Explores the epistemology and the methodology of political knowledge and social inquiry: what can we know, and how do we know? This book offers a variety of answers, addressing the purpose and methods of research and analyzing concepts, including the relationship of theory and evidence, and the changing formulation of neopositivism.

This book explores the epistemology and the methodology of political knowledge and social inquiry: what can we know, and how do we know? Contributing authors offer a variety of answers, addressing the purpose and methods of research and analyzing concepts, including the relationship of theory and evidence, the changing formulation of neopositivism, and the importance of medicine to social science.

This volume distinguishes itself in the authors' constructive debate of varying approaches to social science. Review: Theory and Evidence provides a much-needed overview of the post-positivist developments in the philosophy of science that are pushing social scientists to re-examine their epistemological and methodological commitments.

The essays are accessible and yet informed by a challenging philosophical literature on such subjects as scientific realism and naturalism. Although the editors and contributors range from neo-positivist to interpretivist views, they directly engage one another rather than speaking past each other, and they avoid either Procrustean resolutions or ambiguous compromises among their diverse perspectives.

What emerges is a lively and open-minded dialogue that deserves a wide audience in research design and philosophy of social science courses not just in political science, but in economics, sociology, history, and anthropology. --Andrew Bennett, Professor of Government, Georgetown University At last, a book that sets forth the terms of a challenging dialogue about the epistemological and ontological foundations of empirical political inquiry.

A superb antidote for that large body of empirical research that is mired in a naive positivism long abandoned by philosophy of science, supported by a brilliant case for tolerant methodological pluralism. --David Easton, Distinguished Research Professor, University of California, Irvine and Andrew MacLeish Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus, University of Chicago