Debate on Two Articles For most scholars, the development of theory is highly valued. Generalization and simplification are of great significance. The use or misuse of scientific knowledge to achieve political agendas is a reason to keep being on the sidelines and away from the policy fray. The theory is perceived as an invective hurled at abstraction and irrelevance by most activists and policymakers. Practitioners are mostly worried about the sources underlying theoretical prepositions because flawed conclusions may follow in the event that sources are unreliable. Thus, policy relevance is prioritized over academic theory. Although many policymakers fail to recognize academic theorizing and many academics continue to criticize the actions of government officials, theory can play an instrumental role in promoting international security and relations. Policymakers rely on purely factual knowledge, rules of thumb, typologies, and empirical laws for policy decision making and pay very little attention to the instrumental role played by theory in the conduct of foreign policy. A theory is a causal explanation. It establishes repeating relations between various phenomena and explains the existence of such a relationship. Theories invariably simplify reality to make it comprehensible by providing us with a picture of the primary forces that influence real-world behavior. International security theories explain security competition levels between countries, the level and forms of international cooperation, and the spread of ideas, norms, and institutions1.
Buy this excellently written paper or order a fresh one from acemyhomework.com
1
Nye Jr, Joseph S., and Sean M. Lynn-Jones. "International security studies: a report of a conference on the state of the field." The MIT Press, 12, no. 4 (1988): 5-27.
