Analytic Eclecticism in Practice: A Method for Combining International Relations Theories

Abstract

The relation of different theoretical approaches to one another is a disquieting question in International Relations (IR). Building on recent scholarship addressing the logic of questions and the analytical tools the scholarship provides for investigating the contributions of different explanations this piece argues that any and all explanations are an answer to a contrastive why-question. First, the article presents the objections to eclecticism. It then reviews the application of the logic of questions to IR and develops a "contrast theory" clarifying this logic: Seeking an explanation means delimiting a contrast space within a specific interrogatory context. The article lastly shows how these concepts help in thinking about post-foundational science of IR, that is, a science with no universal epistemological foundation to knowledge. I argue that the pragmatic, problem-driven and complexity-sensitive research agendas are a stronger foundation than currently predominant conceptualizations. An example, drawn from Iran's attempts to acquire nuclear weapons, helps illustrate the value-added by a logic of questions approach.

Before eclecticism: competing alternatives in constructivist research

“…These points parallel recent work from Eric Grynaviski (2012) and Jérémie Cornut (2015), who argue that 'how' and 'why' questions can usually be translated more precisely into a single space of 'contrastive-why' questions in the form of 'why p rather than q?'. Grynaviski argues that such phrasings translate a wide range of scholarship into questions about 'counterfactual difference-makers', which he proposes as a broadly acceptable definition of 'cause'.…”

Unintended Consequences of EU External Action

“…Notably, in one way or another all contributions support the assertion of unintended consequences literature that a plurality of causes are at work in each given case and consider this (highly) applicable to an international relations context. In this way, we acknowledge the complexity of social phenomena and join the chorus of voices that have embraced analytical eclecticism as a method of inquiry in world politics (Cornut 2014;Sil and Katzenstein 2010).…”

Is conflict prevention a science, craft, or art? Moving beyond technocracy and wishful thinking

“…Furthermore, core insights of social constructivism for example about the importance of norms, ideas, and identities have been taken up by rationalist scholars (Sikkink and Kim, 2013;Simmons, 2009;Weinstein, 2007). Analytical eclecticism and mixed methods studies try to combine the comparative strengths of different approaches (Cornut, 2015a;Sil and Katzenstein, 2010). Critical theory asks us to interrogate claims of 'problem-solving' and whether problem-definitions, particularly in the realm of security are bottom-up and emancipatory, or top-down and, perhaps inadvertently, exclusionary and harmful (Booth, 2005;Kanno, 2014).…”