Survival ‘Beyond Positivism?’

• Published in: Politikon (Bucureşti) Vol. 30
• Main Authors: Cagla Luleci, I. Erkam Sula
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: International Association for Political Science Students (IAPSS) 01.07.2016
• Subjects: epistemology; International Relations Theory; philosophy of science; rationalism; reflectivism; research program
• DOI: 10.22151/politikon.30.3

In the late 1980s, Robert Keohane argued that “the greatest weakness of the reflective school of international relations lies not in deficiencies in their critical arguments but in the lack of a clear reflective program that could be employed by students of world politics.” This argument has been one of the initiators of the debate between rationalism and reflectivism in International Relations (IR) theory. This paper aims to question the relevancy of such argument for the reflectivist scholarship. To this aim, it first provides an overview on the major focal points of the so-called rationalism-reflectivism debate. Second, it focuses on Keohane’s argument to understand his accounts on what counts as a ‘research program’ and what he means by ‘reflective scholarship.’ Third, the study revisits the foundational claims, as well as promises of reflective scholarship. Accordingly, the paper concludes that the call for a ‘clear research program’ contradicts with the very foundational claims of reflective scholarship, which has its roots in the criticism of positivist understanding of social science.