Third great debate (Interparadigm debate)

Question 1

debate questions

Answer 1

the nature of knowledge (epistemology) and the validity of methods used to study international relations

Question 2

challenges the

Answer 2

dominance of positivism—the belief that IR can be studied scientifically through empirical, objective methods.

introduces post-positivist approaches, which emphasize subjectivity, context, and the socially constructed nature of knowledge

Question 3

Central to this debate are

Answer 3

the conflicts between traditional positivist theories, like realism and liberalism, (which focus on power, state behavior), AND and critical or post-positivist perspectives, including constructivism, critical theory, feminism, and postcolonialism

Question 4

constructivism, critical theory, feminism, and postcolonialism

Answer 4

these newer approaches argue for the importance of ideas, norms, identities, and power structures, often critiquing traditional theories for perpetuating the status quo and marginalizing alternative voices.

Question 5

3rd Great Debate focuses on

Answer 5

how we understand and study the field, challenging traditional approaches and introducing new ideas.

Question 6

Emerged as

Answer 6

scholars debated whether IR should be studied using scientific, objective methods (positivism) or through approaches that recognize the importance of ideas, social context, and subjective interpretations (post-positivism).

Question 7

post-positivist perspectives, such as constructivism, critical theory, feminism, and postcolonialism, argue that

Answer 7

norms, identities, and power structures also shape international relation

Question 8

This debate questioned the dominance of

Answer 8

Positivism and expanded IR to include diverse voices, alternative methods, and a deeper understanding of global issues, ultimately making the field more inclusive and reflective of complex realities.