You are on page 1of 6

Research Methods in International Relations Week 4 – 12/03/2013 Why do we need theory, we had two reasons for them; one

is pragmatic and the other is ontological. We are receiving an ontological reason, knowledge from lectures, textbooks. Examining knowledge is one in fact elevates someone who has been trained international relations a rank above a level of a journalist. Journalists are on purpose because there is an almost hidden tension between those who are gonna shaped international relations even IR academics and journalists. Journalists see knowledge and academics receive a kind of training what you are received should see not only the knowledge but also the matrix behind knowledge. Knowledge in any form inevitably has behind it and element of theory. Today, our discussion is about historical knowledge. Historical knowledge is something that we come across in history books. By books we mean at least history books at schools. There is an account of events that took place in the past and those accounts are sometimes refer to historical narratives. It is an historical account of what took place in a specific time in the past. Historical narrative often assumed to be the construction of past, based on evidence. Evidence is formed by cronicals of time, testimonies of individuals or objects of the past. Historical narrative is almost like a mirror of the image of reality. The great historian Braudel wrote a book called “Mediterranean”. Published firstly in 1949. It is not about battles, wars, kings, warmen; it is about ordinary people. How do people led their knifes, about geography, river, space. In the prefix of this book the guy makes very interesting statement. He said in the prefix that historical narrative is nothing really but a philosophy of history. This is puzzling because normally you wouldn’t put those words together. Because history is supposed to be about facts. In this sense, if you have an account of what took place in history, you are going to be descriptive. You are going to have a discription. Because you are going to be descriptive, you are supposed to be objective.
Page | 1

And then. This is subjective what you include and exclude. After this. Don’t treat this world as the only world of facts. There is no passage of time. All the ideas are changing. Imagine 2 historians. There is a dilemma that no matter how large the newspaper is the size is limited. You have to be selective. whether the newspaper editor or broadcasting football match you fing behind what has been Page | 2 . For them. what is relevant. To include or exclude you have to ask some questions. Consider a newspaper that is all about facts and publish to communicate public to the mission. In televised football match we don’t have a mediator. There must be difference between speculation and discription. These ideas are perhaps in the direction of speculation. There is behind this speculations. They would have to decide what to include and what to exclude. Let’s assume these historians have the same set of facts although they are working seperately. Whatever it is either the task of historian. Therefore. But it is not possible to produce same narratives. There is something subjective about it. For this. you can’t put everything in it. We confronted with the action. The news coming from agencies has been filtered on the basis of some questions these are philosophical. they would have to rely on some philosophy. speculative questions. what is news worthy. They should be really subjective if they are speculative. It looks like pure fact. Compare to other newspapers there are different answers in terms of editor’s perspective. we use philosophy. You need to decide in stadium where you should put cameras and in what perspective. There is nothing between you and the action. the problem is not over yet. they have to decide on emphasis. Because philosophy means ideas. There is a lot of philosophy behind it. they are studying on French revolution. where exactly you are going to use those individual news items. some facts are more important and some are minor. Newspapers prints what happened in the past 24 hours or even earlier.When we come to philosophy we have never heard of anyone demanding objectivity.

communicated. you have something reducable. doesn’t rely on anything. self contained. These are ideas(qualities) which we project on things. When we refer to facts that is something that it is in itself. self contained. It is useful is value. we often refer to values. There were 2 ancient Greece traditions. relying on something else but other guidance it may be perhaps distinguish between fact and value. How exactly we distinguish between knowledge and belief? Belief is an important notion because we really associate belief to value. we classify our awaraness on knowledge. opinions. Things as they are. In this context. Something that is absolute is autonomous. But when we prove further it is not that easy. Facts are themes as they are. it is by itself. It is self contained. Because it is fact. Definitions are culture specific and definitions can change. There is also Sophist school. Something that is contingent means something relies on something else. behind the knowledge. If we said the piece of cholk is very useful it is value. When we base ourselves to facts. feelings. contingent. How about values? We just talk about ideas. What it means that at first it seems under putting guidelines like being absolute. For belief. If we say weight it is value. we are transforming the ideas to values. This theme is the distinction between facts and values. you can accustom to it. It depends on context. a sharp metalic object. If we say this is a letter opener( sharp metalic object) it changes from culture to culture or place to place. In another context. Behind a knowledge we always have a theory. Braudel’s approach is important for one of the fundamental themes of philosophy of social science. It doesn’t rely on something. It is sharp and metalic is fact. because there is a gravity there and it is process of mass. it becomes a contingency. Sophists were philosophers. Value may also refer to ideas. The distinction between them is very difficult to distinguish. behind the image. fully autonomous. Page | 3 . In turkish it refers to kıymet. conventions. They are subject to gravity. History is supposed to be about facts. One is Socratic tradition. It may use for another purpose. If we say it is a cholk it is fact. Imagine a letter opener. Value also mean material worth in every day language.

This was a scandal for Plato. Because in their viewpoint women were inferior. what we see around us they are all shadows. When we come to the 18. According to Enlightenment philosophers like Immanuel Kant there is knowledge and there is belief. there is only one category. Plato and Aristotle thought that the ideas are not bound by time and space. knowledge doesn’t exist. universal. Socratics were excluded women in the community. This view reduces knowledge to belief. there is a tradition that found its way from Ancient Greece from Socratic tradition. Knowledge is belief plus good reasons for believing. These people were like Plato. It is something pretends to be knowledge. We have belief. It is going to be same in all ages. but they were conducting the constant battle of ideas with the Socratic people. there is no belief. These guys were heretics. According to the Sophist view. belief is subjected to change. What is real is formed by the outside ideas. This is what trabscendental is. All these things according to sophists they are human conventions. Human person is the measure of what is right and what is wrong. Page | 4 .teachers. we don’t see them because we live in a cave. Aristotle and so on as the source of western civilization. What is more. there is knowledge. in the second Enlightenment definition or the modernist definiton. all places. We always see shadows and we are forgetting about real life. rights of barbarians. belief is pseudo knowledge. Plato’s cave and shadow theory. As soon as we have right knowledge we need discard. because we have primitive knowledge. ın the Enlight enment belief doesn’t exist. There is knowledge. belief is local. Pseudo that is not knowledge but pretend to be knowledge. rights of slaves. Plato said that knowledge is transcendental. It is primitive knowledge. Sophists said there is no such thing as a knowledge. Knowledge is transcendental. If you have a good reasons for believing then you have a knowledge. People decide what is just and what is not. In the first definition there is no knowledge. Sophists were defending women’s rights. We need to find and chase these ideas and we need to organize around all these ideas.cc Europe.

They are different human needs. he would ask burning serial. It is not convincing that folk dances are primitive forms of physical education. Belief is culture specific. You are doing it for a purpose and you can improve the practice time to time. In PE there are figures but they have to change. If there is a correspondance between the statement and what the statement is about then it is true. it is very limited. The first view is called the correspondance view of truth. People engaging in folk dances for fun. solidarity. PE is something new. correspondance theory is very basic concept of truth. The second view is that belief is local and knowledge is universal. If you put doomsday and some burning serial to a sophist and ask a sophist which is more convincing. The second theory is the coherence theory of truth. In the philosophy of social sciences there are 3 views for truth. We don’t see facts. According to this. Folk dances have been here for a very long time. it is not much used when you are dealing with high levels of truth testing. to find out whether it is true you simply look at the desk and see whether there is a bottle of water. We Page | 5 . hakikat. they may be apples and oranges. They relate to different needs of human beings. Belief and knowledge are not necessarily connected. local. transcendental. a theory. According to third view.We have list of three views. But it is very limited. They may occupy different positions in human practice. This is the third belief. You can eliminate something and revise it. They don’t have anything in common. you don’t change them. Another important topic is truth. The first is sophist view. a unit of knowledge is true if it forms a coherence part or already established system of truths. Belief and knowledge are not competitors. Because he says it is more convincing belief. we are only assuming so. The assumption is that somebody makes a statement and this statement is about branch of facts and we are able to observe or access to these facts and put them together. they have fun. In folk dances there are figures and they are rigid. Truth in turkish is doğruluk. Consider a distinction between folk dances and physical education(PE). If we say there is a bottle of water on the desk this is a statement.

length. a statement. we just assume this is the case. it produces results. But there was no mension of time. The third view is the pragmatic theory of truth. Space and time are intervolving as the fourth dimension. According to this view. planets. a knowledge something claimed to be a true is true if it produces a results. This was the case with Newtonian case of physics. it will move. if it will works. time is local. According to Newton. a unit of theory. J Page | 6 u D n eto i n i j kag . height. time depends very much on your movement on space. It is pragmatic because one of the catch phrases while we define pragmatism is nothing succeeds like success. We are testing this whether this one is true. This object is going to have a downward road. Because of coherence. A good example of it from daily life is theory of gravity. If this new theory. on the sun. it would be the same passage of time on the moon. on the other stars. Newton have idea about the mechanics of universe.already have an established system of truth and there is a new statement. Space time. forms a coherent part what is already there on which we have already agreed then it is true. new statement fits in. you can’t measure an accurate picture of facts because we don’t have access to the facts but we can see whether it is coherent. it produces results. According to Newton. There is a theory and there seems to be working. I can rotate the time and change the space. Even though we know that the theory was completely false. If you let it go. Nowadays. this theory still being used in this dnage in navigation. we know that beyond the dispute. time is not really universal. According to some. It was wrong but it worked. For hundreds of years it works. space time contuniuing is a fourth dimension. From a pragmatic view point it was true. a new theory. we have 3 dimensions: breadth. producing results. We don’t have the access to all the facts about gravity.