The Scientist, the Moralist, and the Historian

Abstract

In a general sense, the goal of theory in international relations may be said to be similar to the goal of theory in any other field: we want generalized propositions from which, by deduction, we can explain particular facts. In all fields, the “facts” by themselves are chaos; we strive to put an end to this chaos by shaping the interrelations which exist among the facts. However the very notion of how much generalization is possible in the theory of international relations itself presupposes certain very fundamental assumptions. Those who stress the scientific approach, and feel that numerous and significant generalizations are possible, stress the uniformities which characterize international relations. Because they are convinced that significant uniformities exist, they feel we can go quite a long way toward assimilating this area to a pattern of analysis appropriate to the study of natural phenomena. Those who challenge the scientific approach take issue with the possibility of such assimilation. Thus the very adoption of a method of approach to the study of international relations already presupposes an important judgment about the substantive nature of the field.