Designing Social Inquiry Challenges to Positivism Jaechun Kim

CRITICISMS OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD Positivism seeks generalization. Generalization is possible in natural sciences, but generalization in International Relations (or Social Sciences) is impossible! Events in IR is sui generis For e.g., events such as WWI, WWII, and Cold War are sui generis Waltz’s theory of Balance of Power seeks generalization, but is it possible? Waltz’s is a very parsimonious theory, but it cannot be generalized! Alternative to generalizable theory  thick description or interpretation of events! Or verstehen!

INTERPRETIVIST APPROACH Interpretivist approach can be an alternative to Positivism Researchers should seek context-specific knowledge through interpretation…. Social events are context specific!! C. Geertz – in addition to attempting to find out what caused one to act, researchers have to find out that person’s reason for taking that action… meaning of that action… To do that, we have to place the events in a context within which the meaning of actions become explicable… study the backdrops… Verstehen  Immersing oneself in the context… so we can interpret the meaning from the actors’ perspectives Importance of the field work! People, culture, and language… “soaking and poking”

Only after you immerse… you will be able to find out the meanings of action! e.g., Iraq War Interpretive approach is fundamentally different paradigm of inquiry! We are not searching for law-like statements… We want to find out the meaning of particular events or actions… Positivists’ rebuttal? Twitch vs. Wink

Objectivity in International Relations is impossible! Positivists  Belief in objective truth! Theories should be value-free! Social Science theories are always value-laden! Careerism matters for scholars John Mearsheimer – Offensive Realist… Why we will soon miss the Cold War... Positivistic theory vs. Normative theory: What is vs. What ought to be… Positivists – positive theory is possible in IR! At least we should try to be objective! Post-modernists – attacks every element of positivism…. Social science has been the tool of Westerners…

Assessing causality is impossible! (Social) world is too complicated to establish causality! So many forces at work!!! Can’t rerun history to verify!!! Positivists – Sure, but we want to simplify! (Social) world isn’t causal! Endogeneity e.g., Confucian culture  Economic success Big bang theory Chaos theory – study of forever–changing complex systems…. mathematically deterministic, but impossible to identify causal chains… e.g., Butterfly effect

Human beings are reflexive… Social science studies human actions… these are different from nature! Human beings understand that they are being studied, so next time they modify their behaviour… H 2 O The Rise and Fall of Great Powers, Paul Kennedy So let’s forget about scientific theory!… instead let’s interpret… ! Describe the context in which a certain event took place! Get inside the heads of the people, try to understand their motives, identities and meanings developed in specific context in which the event of interest took place… eg., Wars or revolutions Extreme critics tend to be postmodern…

POSITIVISTS’ REBUTTAL Positivistic approach and interpretation is not fundamentally different… Immersing is very important! Verstehen is a rich source of insightful hypotheses… Once hypotheses have been formulated, verification of hypotheses should follow the rules of SM! Science is indispensable for accurate interpretation… e.g., Twitch vs. Wink in KKV Interpretivists’ rebuttal?

Some thoughts on generalization and simplification… Generalization is indeed useless? Generalization is neither possible nor desirable… e.g., French Revolution Even unique events can be studied scientifically by paying attention to the observable implications… E.g., extinction of dinosaurs Counterfactual analysis World is too complicated to generalize? The gap between reality and thick description > the gap between the thick description and the most simplified theory We have no option but to simplify…

RUGGIE AND KRATOWILL International Regime: What is it? Definition? Principles, norms, rules, and decision-making procedures around which actors’ expectations converge in a given issue area in international relations! Regimes are more than formal institutions; they include informal aspects! Informal aspects are (more) important!

Norms – intersubjective (shared) understanding of accepted and desirable forms of social behaviour Then, ontology of regimes is based on intersubjectivity, but epistemology of regime study has been based on obejectivity… Prevalence of game theory in regime studies… Major assumption of game theory??

Positivism separates objectivity from subjectivity, and positivism is not good epistemology when norms matter a great deal! How does intersubjective understanding – norm – affect human behaviour? Norms guide behaviour, inspire, and justify… but norms do not “cause” human behaviour… Since intersubejctive meaning is inferred from behaviour of actors, we should try to get inside the minds of actors… study contexts… we should adopt a more interpretive approach….!