Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T04:16:12.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Towards the politics of causal explanation: a reply to the critics of causal inquiries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2012

Milja Kurki  and
Hidemi Suganami
Milja Kurki
Affiliation:
Department of International Politics, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, Wales, UK
Hidemi Suganami
Affiliation:
Department of International Politics, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, Wales, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Causal inquiry has been a controversial matter in International Relations scholarship in recent years. While many new ‘non-positivist’ stances on causal analysis have been developed in recent years, many post-positivist and critical theorists in the discipline have remained unconvinced of the virtues of causal inquiry. Crucially, the political consequences of causal analysis seem to be a sticking point for many such critics. Yet, the politics of causal analysis are, we argue, complex and relatively poorly engaged with at present. Indeed, the arguments against causal analysis, which rely on warnings concerning the political nature of causal analysis, are inadequate and incomplete. We contend here that causal analysis is, indeed, political but that this does not mean that we should not engage in causal inquiry. On the contrary, we argue that this is what makes causal inquiry interesting and important in social science. A more nuanced and reflective approach to dealings with the politics of causal analysis is needed, and it is such a response that we provoke critics of causal analysis to consider.

Keywords

causal explanationpoliticsethicsinternational relations theory
Type
Original Papers
Information
International Theory , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , November 2012 , pp. 400 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Campbell, David. 1998a. National Deconstruction: Violence, Identity and Justice in Bosnia. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, David 1998b. Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, 2d ed., Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Collingwood, Robin G. 1938. “On the So-Called Idea of Causation.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, new series, 38:85–112.Google Scholar
Culler, Jonathan. 1983. On Deconstruction: Theory and Criticism After Structuralism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1963. “Actions, Reasons, and Causes.” Journal of Philosophy 60:685–700.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 1992. The Other Heading: Reflections on Today's Europe. Translated by Pascale-Anne Brault and Michael B. Naas. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Edkins, Jenny. 1996. “Legality with a Vengeance: Famines and Humanitarian Relief in ‘Complex Emergencies’.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 25(3):547–575.Google Scholar
Edkins, Jenny 1999. Poststructuralism and International Relations: Bringing the Political Back In. Boulder, CO, USA: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Edkins, Jenny 2000. Whose Hunger? Concepts of Famine, Practices of Aid. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert. 1978. What is Sociology? New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Elias, Norbert 1991. The Symbol Theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Erskine, Toni. 2003. “Making Sense of “Responsibility” in International Relations: Key Questions and Concepts.” In Can Institutions Have Responsibilities? Collective Moral Agency and International Relations, edited by Toni Erskine, 1–17. New York and Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Fierke, Karin M. 1998. Changing Games, Changing Strategies: Critical Investigations in Security. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Fierke, Karin M 2005. Diplomatic Interventions: Conflict and Change in a Globalizing World. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
George, Alexander L.Bennett, Andrew. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hansen, Lene. 2006. Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harré, Rom. 1972. Philosophies of Science: An Introductory Survey. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. 1965. “The Functions of General Laws in History.” In Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science, edited by Carl G. Hempel 231–243. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Hollis, MartinSmith, Steve. 1990. Explaining and Understanding International Relations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kratochwil, Friedrich. 1989. Rules, Norms and Decisions, On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kratochwil, Friedrich 2011. “Making Sense of International Practices.” In International Practices, edited by Emanuel Adler and Vincent Pouliot, 36–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kurki, Milja. 2008. Causation in International Relations: Reclaiming Causal Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lake, David A. 2011. “Why “isms” Are Evil: Theory, Epistemology, and Academic Sects as Impediments to Understanding and Progress.” International Studies Quarterly 55:465–480.Google Scholar
Levy, Jack S. 1989. Organizational Routines and the Causes of War. International Studies Quarterly 30:193–222.Google Scholar
Linklater, AndrewSuganami, Hidemi. 2006. The English School of International Relations: A Contemporary Reassessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mackie, John L. 1974. The Cement of the Universe: A Study of Causation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Russett, Bruce. 1962. “Causes, Surprise, and No Escape.” The Journal of Politics 24:3–22.Google Scholar
Scriven, Michael. 1959. “Truisms as Grounds for Historical Explanation.” In Theories of History, edited by Patrick Gardiner, 443–475. London: Collier Macmillan.Google Scholar
Stone, Lawrence. 1994. The Causes of the English Revolution. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Suganami, Hidemi. 1996. On the Causes of War. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Suganami, Hidemi 2006. “Wendt, IR, and Philosophy.” In Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and His Critics, edited by Stefano Guzzini and Anna Leander, 57–72. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Suganami, Hidemi 2008. “Narrative Explanation and International Relations: Back to Basics.” Millennium 37(2):327–356.Google Scholar
Suganami, Hidemi 2011. “Causal Explanation and Moral Judgement: Undividing a Division.” Millennium 39(3):717–734.Google Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wight, Colin. 2006. Agents and Structures in International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zehfuss, Maja. 2003. “Forget September 11th.” Third World Quarterly 24(3):513–528.Google Scholar