| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
134471
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article begins by asking why Karl Deutsch never directly intervened in what has come to be known in the field as the second debate. This point of departure is used to outline Deutsch’s views on the purpose of knowledge. It is apparent that Deutsch was unwilling to make the distinction between the traditional and scientific approaches, which stood at the heart of the debate started by Hedley Bull. Deutsch’s position tried to embrace both approaches, because they were necessary in order to answer the big and important questions he asked. Deutsch also rejected the notion that the scientific approach could be devoid of normative concerns. Finally, the article argues that Deutsch keenly adopted methods connected with the scientific approach because he believed they made it possible to spot new patterns which might hold novel answers to the profoundly normative question of humankind’s survival.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
134468
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The article argues that Karl Deutsch’s work on nationalism is not only a precursor to his ‘security communities’ but that it is central to his international relations (IR). Nationalism impacts what people expect from the state and influences the state’s international behaviour. While these processes are mostly automatic and cannot be controlled, their trajectories are not fully determined. Deutsch is interested in theorising moments when automatic processes do not suffice or become harmful and intervention is needed. The article first introduces Deutsch as a theorist of nationalism, examining his contribution in the context of the field of nationalism studies and the reasons for his equivocal reception in this field. In its second part, the article makes sense of the legacy of Deutsch’s work on nationalism for contemporary IR by focusing on his use of the notion of self-determination with which Deutsch transcends the normative imperatives of the narrower concept of national self-determination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
134466
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The article provides a reminiscence of Karl Deutsch as a teacher and scholar. I examine his scholarship and focus on its enduring qualities. In particular, I highlight how he was a passionate advocate of innovative approaches to enduring political problems. His comprehensive theoretical vision, with central concepts such as communication and learning, remains as inspiring as his methodological eclecticism. It offers a synthesis of traditional sociology of the Europe he had left behind with the rationalist empiricism that he encountered in America.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
134465
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this article, I describe Karl Deutsch’s personal and political background and career and offer an assessment of him as a scholar, teacher, and mentor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
134469
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Karl Deutsch focused in his work on many social, political and technical aspects of building political community which can enrich our understanding of international cooperation and European integration. It is especially his concept of the political community that helps us to explain current problems of the European integration: namely, the current pre-occupation with the market and institutions leads to the neglect of the common redistribution and of the horizontal ties among the state institutions and among the peoples. This article also points to the tension between Deutsch’s awareness that the study of political communities requires the examination of values, love and spirituality, and his positivist, quantitative methods which do not allow for such an examination. This tension invites to a re-reading of Deutsch, which can enrich the liberal tradition of international relations (IR).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
134470
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article offers first a brief commentary on Karl Deutsch and his collaborators’ development of the concept of security community, before moving to a critical review of constructivist attempts by Adler, Barnett and their colleagues at resurrecting it. The article makes the case that while the serious effort to give security community a new life is laudable, the appropriation also renders the concept at once theoretically complex and methodologically superficial. Drawing constructive lessons from the previous research, it seeks to demonstrate the potential of the security communities research provided that it (1) restores the Deutschian ethos of rigorous, transparent, collective and transdisciplinary research; (2) takes seriously the challenge to the realist paradigm by zooming in and out of the modern state when thinking about security community; and (3) in addition to processes of integration investigates more thoroughly also the processes of disintegration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
134464
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This introduction to this Special Issue of International Relations dedicated to Karl Deutsch makes the case that his scholarship was transformative in more ways than is typically recognized in the discipline. Besides being a theoretical and methodological innovator, Deutsch also envisaged that research must have transformative qualities for the future of human relations. The latter in particular deserves attention of International Relations (IR) students because it opens up possibilities for novel empirical and theoretical research of international politics. Deutsch clearly believed that social scientific research must be normatively grounded and serve normative purposes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
134467
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In tracing his 15-year relationship with Karl W. Deutsch, Andrei S. Markovits portrays the key intellectual agendas and major scholarly contributions that formed the core of Deutsch’s academic life. The article highlights how Deutsch’s personal life as well as his singularly impressive qualities shaped the originality and greatness of his intellectual contributions but also the profound humaneness of his quotidian life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|