| ID | 117031 |
| Title Proper | Epistemology matters |
| Other Title Information | a reply to David Patrick Houghton and a call for epistemethodological pluralism |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Devine, Karen |
| Publication | 2012. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | In a 2008 International Politics article, David Patrick Houghton questions the importance of 'The Third Debate' in IR theory between 'positivism and postmodernism' and the relative worth of contrasting epistemological positions. Houghton's main argument is that the philosophical underpinnings of IR have not been central to what IR scholars actually do; specifically, the epistemological differences between positivists and postmodernists have little practical effect upon their empirical findings. In short, epistemology does not matter. This article analyses Houghton's thesis within the context of a dominant discourse in the discipline that derides postpositivism and, by corollary, rejects methodological pluralism incorporating both positivist and postpositivist approaches, what I refer to as 'epistemethodological pluralism'. This article questions the main assumptions underpinning this discourse by deconstructing the definition of 'postpositivism' that underpins the 'naysayer' arguments deriding or dismissing epistemological differences between positivism and postpositivism. Using examples of positivist and postpositivist research that focus on the foreign policy of the United States, European Union integration and Middle East politics, the article demonstrates how epistemological issues have a significant impact on empirical research in International Relations and illustrates the benefits of integrating the different epistemological approaches. |
| `In' analytical Note | International Politics Vol. 49, No.6; Nov 2012: p.710-745 |
| Journal Source | International Politics Vol. 49, No.6; Nov 2012: p.710-745 |
| Key Words | Epistemethodological Pluralism ; Poststructuralism ; Postpositivism ; Eepistemology ; Positivism ; Methodological Pluralism |