Social science, similar to any science, attains to advance through the collection of orderly learning. To enhance our aggregate comprehension of international politics we have to frequently evaluate both the observational regularities saw in our general surroundings and the theories that proclaim to clarify these actualities as we now know them.
Political science as a rule and the investigation of international politics specifically experience the ill effects of having various contending theories, affirmations and guesses depicting the same phenomena. Albeit new clarifications and depictions of interstate war seem as much of the time as the occasions themselves, new thoughts once in a while supersede those already created. Rather, they essentially amass with little respect paid to the illustrative force of new records versus those already progressed. All through history, war has been fought for economic, territorial and other reasons. This has brought about the huge number of models, untested theories and different statements that constitute the control.
The investigation of international conflict epitomizes these issues.
1 comment:
I believe that these loopholes exist in most of the theories because one way or the other, all these theories have incorporated some sort of assumptions, which moves them away from the reality and as they say, "every thing works out well in theories, but in the end they are just theories".
Post a Comment