Chapter 9 Review questions

Post-positivism in IR

Identify the post-positivist view of knowledge and power as spelled out by Steve Smith. Do you support his view? Why or why not?
What is the methodological difference between scientifically explaining an international phenomenon and historically interpreting an international event or episode? Are those methodologies compatible or contradictory?
Summarize the main issues in the debate between positivists and post‑positivists. Which side in the debate do you favour? Why?
Identify at least two major post‑positivist approaches. What are the most significant methodological similarities and differences between them?
What is the better way of looking at IR methodologies: as categorically different or as conceptually overlapping?
How do discourse and identity influence international relations according to post-colonialists?
Discuss the contributions of Feminist IR to the discipline. Are conventional approaches biased by gendered thinking?
Is it possible to study IR without a methodological approach?
Is it possible to argue that certain IR methodologies are preferable on scientific grounds? Or is the choice of methodology a matter of non-scientific or even personal preference?
Are IR methodologies ideologies in disguise? Give examples of methodologies and ideologies in your answer.